Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Thank you.

Oh, my God.

Thank you.

April 9th, 2026 Planning Commission hearing. I'll call the hearing to order at 1 p.m. Ms. Carmen, can we please have roll call?

Thank you, Chair Boss. I'll begin with Chair Boss. Present. Vice Chair DeLuccio?

Here.

Commissioner Barnwell?

Here.

Commissioner Bauke?

Here.

And Commissioner Wiscombe? Here. We have quorum. Thank you.

All right. Thank you. We'll get started with preliminary matters. And the first topic on our agenda today is requests for continuances, withdrawals, postponements, or ex-agenda items. Ms. Arzuniega, do we have any?

Thank you, Chair Bost. We do not.

OK. Do we have any announcements or appeals?

We do not.

OK. All right. We'll go on to item C, review consideration and action on draft planning commission minutes from two hearings, March 12th and March 19th.

Ms. Arcinaga, did you have a? Apologies to interrupt. I did forget one appeal. The Edgewater Project 2339, Edgewater was appealed to city council. So that will be scheduled, I believe, at the end of June.

Appealed by the neighbor.

Appealed by the neighbor, correct.

All right. Moving on to minutes from March 12th and March 19th, we'll take these as two separate action items. First, are there any planning commissioner comments on the March 12th minutes? If not, are there any public speaker comments for these minutes?

I do not have any comments for those minutes.

If no comments, can I get a motion to approve the March 12th Planning Commission minutes?

So moved. Second.

And Ms. Carman, can we please have a roll call vote?

Thank you, Chair Boss. I'll begin with Commissioner Bauke.

Yes.

Commissioner Barnwell.

Yes.

Commissioner Wiscombe.

Yes.

Vice Chair DeLuccio.

Yes.

And Chair Boss. Yes. Motion passes. Thank you.

And are there any Planning Commissioner comments on the March 19th minutes and resolution?

Yes. Madam Chair, I... I was confused by the, I think, did Commissioner Barnwell, you were the one that mentioned the, mentioned item number two, item number one and two of the changes. Is that right?

I, what were those two?

I'm just, I'm just questioning whether they actually got put because I don't remember.

I actually read the resolution. I compare the original resolution against the, um, what we decided on and everything's incorporated.

But those changes were made. Yes. Did we approve those changes? That's what I'm saying. Oh, I, when I originally made the motion, they were not in there. Oh. And then I think commissioner Barnwell came on and said something, but, um, Ms. Arciniega had already said that they were very similar to the language in the coastal land use plan.

If I may interject to the chair, that is correct. So I think Commissioner Barnwell's comment was that it doesn't read exceptionally clear. It is language taken exactly from the coastal land use plan. Apologies. word for word verbatim as a condition if he felt that that language wasn't clear that we needed to just kind of reorder a sentence basically to help it read better that's still consistent with the policy so a change that's minor enough that it's matching the language and intent of the policy I think is acceptable to change if it's just for clarity but we can't change the policy language itself So staff worked to just reorder the sentence. Basically, it was putting up front how that would work and the sentence about expiration, kind of bringing that to the front of the paragraph. And then I think there was perhaps a second reiteration or clarification. So the changes still reflect the policy language and intent, just in a different order. Okay, I don't know. We interpreted that it was, but... That's fine.

That's fine. Let's just leave it like it is. Thank you.

Any other comments on the March 19th minutes or resolution? Okay. Are there any public speaker comments for these minutes or resolution?

I do not have any comments for those minutes.

If none, can I get a motion to approve the minutes and resolution?

So moved. I'll second.

Ms. Carman, can we please have a roll call vote?

Thank you, Chair Boss. I'll begin with Commissioner Barnwell.

Yes.

Commissioner Bauke.

Yes.

Commissioner Wiscombe. Yes. Vice Chair DiLuccio. Yes. And Chair Boss.

Abstain.

Motion passes. Thank you.

Thank you. That takes us to item D, comments from members of the public pertaining to items that are not on today's agenda. Ms. Carman, do we have anyone in person or remote who would like to give public comment?

So at this time, we don't have anyone in the room with us and we don't have anyone online. And we did not receive any written correspondence under general. So I'll give it back to you.

Thank you. We'll close general public comment and move on to our discussion item today, review of options for waterfront adaptation plan. The purpose of this hearing is to receive an update on coastal erosion and flooding hazards at the waterfront and potential adaptation options to be studied further in the upcoming plan. So we have staff here to provide a presentation who will introduce themselves during that presentation. The floor is yours.

Honorable Chair and members of the Planning Commission, thank you for the opportunity to present on our waterfront adaptation plan. My name is Timmy Bolton, Senior Climate Adaptation Analyst and Project Manager for this work effort. I am joined here today by Melissa Hedrick, Adaptation and Resilience Program Manager, as well as Michael Wells, Climate Adaptation Analyst. We're unique as a city in that we have a dedicated adaptation and resilience program with three full time staff whose purpose is to work collaboratively with teams throughout the city organization to prepare our community for current and future climate related hazards like sea level rise, flooding, erosion, and wildfire. We're actively working on several major work efforts that include a regional coastal monitoring project with our partners at Beacon, We're preparing our water and wastewater infrastructure for all climate hazards. We're addressing flooding from rain in the Laguna watershed, and we're supporting an adaptation project at the airport. Our other current major project is the waterfront adaptation plan, which is funded by the California Coastal Commission, the California Coastal Conservancy, as well as the city. My presentation today will begin with a brief overview of current and future coastal hazards. I'll then run through the toolbox of potential solutions on how to address those hazards, as well as some initial ideas we have on how to improve the waterfront experience for all of our users, and then really spend the bulk of the presentation introducing some initial ideas we have on things that we're considering carrying forward in the process for a follow-on phase when we do a technical analysis and ultimately build towards a recommended approach. Our guiding light and vision for this work effort is shown on the screen here. It's to develop practical solutions to address coastal flooding and coastal erosion for at least the next 30 years while enhancing beach access, recreation, boating, and habitat. This is about a two and a half year work effort, and we find ourselves about halfway through it. We've completed an initial community engagement campaign in early last year, as well as spent a big effort conducting new technical analysis and modeling to get a much better idea of what our hazard risks are today as what they will be in the future with continued sea level rise. We now find ourselves at the exciting juncture where we're starting to talk about solutions and beginning to sketch out some of the ideas on how we can address those risks. What you'll see presented today is really the first pass at whittling down the big spectrum of all the things that we could do to a suite of options that we're considering carrying forward in the process. The next step after this is to do a follow-on technical analysis that will do the technical details of feasibility, effectiveness, timing, and cost. I really want to emphasize that we're at the very beginning of at least a year-long process to build towards that recommended approach and determine what the eventual design solutions will be. Our project area is the three-mile low-lying coastal area of our city that spans from Leadbetter Beach to the Clark Estate. It's one of the city's most valued public assets. It supports beaches, parks, the working harbor, fishing, tourism, recreation, and transportation. And it really serves as one of the cornerstones of our local economy, with upwards of $100 million in recreational value. It plays a big part of the county's $7.7 billion blue economy. as well as the $2.2 billion South Coast tourism market. Due to its location and elevation, it's an area that's particularly vulnerable to flooding, storms, and erosion. The waterfront as a place has a shoreline that has only ever told one consistent story, and that's that it's ever changing. From the thousands of years that the Chumash lived along a naturally shifting coast of beaches, wetlands, and dunes that was naturally shaped by winter storms and currents, to the creation of Stearns Wharf in 1872, that fixed a point on an otherwise ambulatory coast and created a permanent industrial edge to our town that spurred year-round access and intensified those uses along the coast. The shoreline was forever changed with the creation of the harbor that trapped sand that would otherwise move with currents down the coast and created the beaches as we know them today. We now find ourselves at that next major inflection point when we must take deliberate action to address the impacts we faced during recent coastal storms and the challenges we anticipate seeing in the future with continued sea level rise to save our beaches, to protect the harbor, and to protect our inland areas. For this project, we're primarily focused on two broad categories of impacts. The first is the area where waves are actively crashing and causing damage, and the second is the inland areas that are being flooded from the ocean. Today, we face both types of those impacts. We've experienced big waves bashing against our shoreline. We've experienced undermining and partial collapse of our coastal access parking, as shown in the Harbor West parking lot in that middle left graphic. We've separately experienced flooding and our parking lots getting covered in sand, as shown in that middle right graphic, as well as flooding in the Harbor commercial area itself. At the end of the day, it's not sustainable for us as a city to spend $3 million on repair and cleanup from an individual large coastal storm like we did in 2023, which is one of the core reasons why we're doing this work effort. As part of this project, we took a deep dive to better understand how our shoreline has changed and evolved over time. And what we found matched our anecdotal experience, which is that there's an erosion challenge at East Beach. And in some areas, it's been eroding up to five feet a year since the year 2000. This photo in the middle shows East Beach during a recent king tide event this past November. And what we see during that elevated water condition is that the ocean was right up to the ice plant and in some cases spilled over to the bike path. This is important because it means we're not only losing recreational access to East Beach over time, but that the inland areas around it are increasingly at risk of flooding from the ocean. So what I mean by that is the right portion of this photo is far more vulnerable to coastal hazards today than certainly it was in the year 2000. Luckily, there's different dynamics along our shoreline. So while we've experienced this arose in East Beach, Leadbetter has been generally stable and West Beach has been slightly accretional during the same time period. As we look forward in time, we see that our risk profile will evolve and with continued sea level rise, the magnitude and severity of our challenges will only grow. As a quick data point, since the year 2000, we've experienced three to four inches of local sea level rise based on our local tide buoys. And we expect that number and that rate to increase quite a bit in the coming period, creating quite the challenge. Before I launch into what this will look like along the waterfront, I just wanted to take a quick moment to pause and highlight the nature of our greater coastal area in the city as well as in the region. Most of our region and about half the city have beaches that have inland bluffs behind them. And why this is important is that over time as the shoreline continues to march inland with continued sea level rise, it means that access to the dry sandy beach in front of these bluff areas will be increasingly limited over time. This will increase the importance of and the demand for the low-lying sandy beaches that we have along the greater waterfront area, which is the core reason why we're really focused on preserving that function and use. Diving now into future shoreline positions, what these different lines show is where the future shoreline will be over time with sea level rise. All of the historic erosion processes continue, all of the dredging and continued dynamics and operations continue along our waterfront. These all reflect a so-called do nothing scenario where really the addition of the modeling just considers sea level rise on top of those historic processes. So in the green shows future shoreline position with 0.8 feet of sea level rise or about the year 2050. The red in the middle is about 1.6 foot of sea level rise or the year 2065. And then the blue is 2.5 feet of sea level rise or about the year 2075. And what we see here then based on this information is that we've lost the sandy beach in front of a good portion of Leadbetter and in front of the harbor commercial area within about the next 50 years if we do nothing. although it does fare a little bit better in front of Shoreline Cafe and the picnic area. If we look at West Beach, we see a similar trend where there begins to be some erosion. It's no longer recreational. But one of the key findings here is that even with that bit of erosion, this beach remains wide and sandy, and it remains wide and sandy well beyond the 30-year focus of this project, which really creates this profound opportunity to really focus and encourage and centralize a sandy beach experience in this West Beach area, which is critical when we look at the other reach of our waterfront on East Beach. As I mentioned, we've had this historic erosion challenge, and that only grows when you add in higher levels of sea level rise on top of that. So what we found in our analysis is that by about the year 2065, we've lost the sandy beach along a huge portion of East Beach. And at some point between 2065 and 2075, this entire area could erode all the way up to Cabrillo Boulevard, which creates quite the challenge. If we take a deep dive now and really hone in on the flood risk side of things, the inland areas being flooded from the ocean, these are similar graphics in that they represent a do nothing scenario, all of the existing infrastructure remains, the existing processes remain. What's new is the addition of sea level rise on top of it. So in the dark teal is our current high tide position, the light teal is future high tide with sea level rise, and then these other colors represent different storm conditions. And what we see is that even today on that left graphic, During really big coastal storms, our inland areas already have some risk of coastal flooding and Cabrillo Boulevard is already at risk. When you start adding in additional sea level rise on top of that, the extent of that inland flood risk only grows throughout time. The point here is to really emphasize that we need some sort of vertical protective measure that serves as the backstop to prevent water from the ocean flooding our lower downtown and our inland neighborhoods. For the purpose of this project, we are primarily focused on the paradigm shown in that left and middle graphic, while preparing for and setting ourselves up for success for the paradigm shown in that right graphic by the end of the century. So I know I've talked a whole lot about all the challenges we have, but I really want to emphasize that at the end of the day, it's really not all doom and gloom, and we have a toolbox with proven solutions. We often get asked, can't you just put a seawall or a vetment up along the entire waterfront and call it good? And to a certain extent, we could. Those types of hard solutions do a pretty good job of protecting what's directly behind them from erosion, from flooding, from other types of coastal hazards. The massive trade-off and challenge that comes with these types of hard structures is that as waves come in and bounce off them, they can increase the erosion from the beach in front of them. So they can cause a narrowing of the beach. So if we have this foundational goal to really save the sandy beach experience, taking these types of hard structures as a holistic approach could be counterproductive relative to that goal. That being said, they can make a lot of sense for certain things. When we have critical infrastructure like the harbor that can't really be moved, these types of things can be a great solution. Beach nourishment, sand berms and dunes are a softer approach that can be incorporated into hazard resilience. They can do a good job of widening the beaches by mimicking or restoring natural processes. The primary Achilles heel with these types of softer approaches though is that because they're not anchored in place like the sea walls is that if you have really big waves come in, they can quickly wash that sand out to sea or they can push it inland That initial photo I showed of the Harbor West and Ledbetter parking lots covered in sand, that was our seasonal sand berm that got hit by big waves during a big storm and just pushed it all and covered the parking lot. Because of this, they require ongoing maintenance, as well as a sand source, and then in the case of dunes, specific conditions to work most effectively. Growings, headlands, and artificial reefs are another portion of that toolbox. The way these types of solutions work is by providing a perpendicular element to the shoreline They effectively trap sand that would otherwise move with currents down the coast, similar to how our harbor operates. These can be a great solution to widen beaches. The big challenge, though, is that because they do that sand trapping function, there's also the potential to starve down coast beaches, which creates all sort of political and legal risk associated with that. Because of that, they're more complex to permitting. They require ongoing management and maintenance. And so you have to factor in not only the cost to build these things, but also then to maintain them and make sure they're full of sand over time. The final big category within the toolbox is the idea of strategically relocating things. It can be a great strategy if you take things that are currently in a hazard area and you take them out of the hazard area. This is certainly approach that's favored by our funding and permitting partners. And it can be a great aspect of really that sandy beach preservation approach. The big challenge with these is that some things can't be easily moved. The harbor is not something we can easily move. There's not always a replacement site. There can be impacts to the surrounding areas. And we need to consider the economic challenges that could be created from this if we're starting to lose revenue generating assets, how it impacts existing leases, those types of things. So I know I've talked quite a bit about coastal hazards, but we're really taking a holistic approach to infrastructure improvements as part of this project. If we're going to make these big investments in our waterfront, why not also do it in a way that improves the experience for our users? So the ideas shown on this slide really all came from the initial community engagement campaign that we did last year of, hey, what can we do better? What would make your experience better along the waterfront? A big one is we need to have a safe space to walk and bike throughout the entire project area. There's some pretty notable gaps in that network today where you're along the bike path and then really at the harbor entrance, you just kind of get spit out in the Harbor West and Ledbetter parking lot area. So we plan to address that gap and improve that safety as part of this work effort. As I mentioned, we really see this profound opportunity to reimagine West Beach. Today, we have this paradigm where stormwater drains really pool out and pond on West Beach from when it rains. So you end up in that scenario you see in that top middle graphic where we have these big ponds that then compact the sand and make it not as ideal of an experience as it could be. So we plan to address that. There's certainly epic moments and views along the waterfront, but there are also places that aren't quite as welcoming or connected as they could be. So that's the theme you'll see sort of embedded into some of these ideas I'll introduce later, is how can we make it feel welcoming and connected for our users? We've heard clear demand for additional facilities, everything from bathrooms to boat storage. We're looking at any and all opportunities to expand economic vitality, both to support the local economy, but also to generate revenue. for continued operations and management of our waterfront and also hopefully to help pay for some of these infrastructure improvements. And finally, there's a rich recreational heritage along the waterfront. We want to celebrate and expand that wherever possible. As we start talking about solutions, we're primarily focused on those that are multi-benefit. And so what we mean by that is, OK, if we're going to add this new safe way to walk and bike, this new transportation facility in the Harbor West and Ledbetter parking lot area, why not design it in a way that also addresses the hazard risk that we've been experiencing and will continue to experience in that same area? So one idea is this concept of an elevated walking and biking path. This is a very conceptual drawing done by AI on the right. But the idea being you have this elevated structure that provides the safe space to walk and bike, but then also provides that ultimate backstop when you have the big storms and you have the higher water levels, and then protects our inland areas from being flooded by the ocean. So this is something you'll see embedded in a number of ideas shown later. So taking all of this information into consideration and building this preliminary list of options, starting the conversation as we work towards figuring out what to study further in this next project phase. It's really all centered around the four goals shown on this slide. First and foremost, it's saving the sandy beach and it's enhancing recreation. It's protecting the commercial working harbor in place and all of its coastal dependent uses. It's protecting our inland areas for flooding from the ocean. And it's providing that safe way to walk and bike throughout the entire waterfront, ideally in combination with that flood protection component. Like all of our projects, we're really focused on right sizing and phasing them based on when they're actually required based on monitor on the ground conditions. So for this project, we've got three project types. The first are the quick wins. These are the low hanging fruit, things that can be done really quickly, things that can be done generally within existing city budget reserves. We're talking things like restriping parking lots, minor drainage improvements, and using temporary flood walls when we have storms. The so-called core measures are really the foundational holistic moves as part of this project. They provide comprehensive hazard protection for at least the 30-year life of this project, and it covers the entire area as a comprehensive strategy. Things like that elevated walking and biking path. These are things that we would start permitting immediately after planned adoption. The final category is what we're calling so-called future options. These are things that aren't necessarily required to protect from the hazards we anticipate seeing in the next 30 years. And there are also some things that more fundamentally change the dynamics and nature of the shoreline, so things like groins, headlands, those types of things that trap sand. The way we're seeing this all come together is that really the quick wins are minor stopgap solutions while we work on doing the core measure projects. Those will take some time to permit, fund, and build, and so doing those quick wins to provide that stopgap while we do that. Regardless of which future options we pursue, we think we'll have to do those core measures regardless. So that's really the bread and butter key focus of this work effort while keeping those in mind for later. So diving right into it, we'll work west to each along our project area, starting first at Leadbetter Beach and the options we're considering there. The vision here is really all about preserving this space as a sandy beach and recreation destination. The so-called potential quick win projects are all about doing immediate safety and flooding fixes. So a key one there is providing that safe way to walk and bike, exploring the option of really taking the edge of the existing paved area and restriping it in a way similar to you see in that top left graphic where you have separate space to walk and bike. Also looking at the option of doing some temporary deployable flood proofing, so putting out measures when we have storms to protect Shoreline cafe as well as the restroom Seeing if there's the option to have a low curb wall at the edge of the paved area to protect that parking lot Foundation as well as from low storm events that graphic is from West Beach. So it's similar vibe to that Because there's the potential to impact some parking by providing that new restriped space to walk and bike We're also being exploring the option of can we capture some excess right away? Which is in the far left of the graphic and adjacent to shoreline to provide additional parking spaces in this parking lot? Can we take some of the really large landscaped areas, shrink them slightly to provide more parking spaces? With a goal here of really having a net zero impact to the number of parking spaces in this area. The so-called core measures here are really all about this idea of strategically moving things inland to allow space for the shoreline to naturally migrate inland over time and remain sandy, so to save that sandy beach experience. An option here is to take area that's currently park, convert it to sandy beach. Behind that, what's currently paved could be converted to a park area as well as space for any relocated assets. Behind that, we would then have the elevated walking and biking path to provide that ultimate backstop from those big storms and the high water levels as well as that safe transportation function. I do want to mention that when we're talking about strategic relocation, this can be done in phases. For instance, we can move Shoreline Cafe and the restrooms when we have replacement facilities available for them to go to or when there's some sort of on the ground hazard threshold trip that makes them not safe to operate anymore. Because there's the potential to impact some coastal access parking, we're looking at opportunities to expand the number of spaces on the other side of Shoreline Drive out of the hazard zone. with the idea of a multi-story parking garage in the two areas generally circled there in the north portion of that graphic, as well as addressing some known stormwater drainage challenges that we experience in this area today. The potential future options are really an extension of the strategy of strategically moving things in. Really things are just pushed back further and that elevated walking and biking path could be raised higher. I do want to emphasize though that that green area that looks very park-like could be that function. It could also provide space for relocated assets. We could tweak it a little bit, still figuring out those details. What's new here is the introduction of a potential headland at the harbor breakwater, which you'll see in the next series of graphics, with the idea being that coupled with some beach nourishment, you could widen the beach a bit, maintain the sandy beach for longer, and provide some additional hazard protection. Jumping now into the harbor area, where our vision is really to maintain it as a commercial fishing, recreation, and public access destination. The quick winds are quite similar to that at Leadbetter. It's exploring Temporary deployable flood proofing during storms to strategically protect specific assets. It's potentially doing some minor drainage improvements in the harbor commercial area itself to improve drainage. And then it's continuing that restriped area to provide that safe and separated space to walk and bike. The potential core measures are really all about flood protection for the entire harbor commercial area while prioritizing public access and boating. A big move here could be exploring this idea of doing an elevated rock revetment in front of the entire harbor commercial area that would connect to the breakwater that's shown in sort of the bottom left portion of this graphic. This would provide that hazard protection from erosion, big storms, and flooding, and it could be topped with a pedestrian promenade to improve public access in this area. It could include stairs down to the beach, down to the water, down to the ocean. It would also provide a much better connection for our users from the Leadbetter area to the breakwater itself and provide 360 circulation for folks to walk around the entire Harbor commercial area. The Harbor commercial area has limited space and there's high demand for what's all of its coastal dependent uses. So there's a key goal at looking at how to protect and improve that Harbor commercial area function to better support public access and boating. Also looking at strategic ways to enhance the walking and biking path and raising it in specific areas to provide that ultimate backstop as well as we did a parking study as part of this work effort and found that there is a bit of excess capacity in the harbor main parking lot area. So one idea is exploring the option of doing some economic development there. We could provide new facilities that support boating, we could do retail, we could do restaurants, looking to see if there's other ways to generate some additional revenue to again fund ongoing harbor operations and management and greater waterfront operations and management as well as funding some of these improvements. The potential future options here are really all about further hazard protection, exploring the idea of raising all the paths and edges to withstand bigger storms, higher water levels. This is where that idea of the headland is introduced, coupled with beach nourishment to widen the beach a bit in front of the harbor commercial area and provide some additional hazard protection. Here, too, exploring some ideas to protect the marina itself. looking at the idea of a wave screen shown in yellowish in the bottom right of that graphic, as well as a potential sand trap at the entrance of the harbor itself. Shifting now to West Beach, where the vision is really that premier sandy beach destination. Because this is a relatively wide and stable beach for a long time, there's only one project category in this area, and it's a core measure project, which again is really that vision of a premier sandy beach. The first thing we need to do to achieve that vision is address the stormwater challenge. One idea is to consolidate those pipes so that instead of outfalling and ponding onto the beach, they go into a shared pipe that then gets redirected and potentially drained out by the base of Stern's Wharf. That would improve the sand quality and make it a better experience. If we're really leaning into this idea of a sandy beach experience, a full day out with your family at the beach, we need to add some facilities to support that. So shown in the bottom left in that orange area is a potential area to add some restrooms, showers, cafe, beach concessions, things like that. Like our other areas, exploring the idea of that elevated walking and biking path back by the road to provide that ultimate backstop This could also be coupled with a new adjacent park area that could just provide a much better connection and welcoming experience from our users going from the harbor commercial area to lower State Street, lower downtown, and the wharf. Also wanna highlight that we very much intend to retain space for small boats, outriggers to malls, et cetera, probably in a more efficient, better improved facility scenario. And finally, East Beach, the vision here is quite similar to that at Ledbetter. It's all about preserving that sandy beach and recreation destination for as long as we can. The challenge here though is that erosion condition that only grows with sea level rise on top of it. The strategy here though is more or less the same thing, which is strategically moving things inland to provide space for that shoreline to naturally migrate inland as long as we can and retain as sandy as long as we can. So similar idea of taking an area that's currently park, converting that to sandy beach, and then behind that, having that elevated walking and biking path to provide that last line of defense, ultimate backstop, high water levels, big storms. For the potential future options, we really don't have any more space to strategically move things in further. So the question becomes, are there engineered solutions that we can employ to widen the beach a bit to make it sandy longer, provide more hazard protection for longer. So one of the things we're considering looking at is exploring the idea of growing tidelands or offshore reefs, things that could provide that function while considering all the trade-offs that come from those types of solutions. The elevated walking and biking path could be raised higher to provide additional protection. As with Leadbetter, exploring the idea of taking existing surface parking lots and converting that to multi-story to provide more coastal access parking. And separately, we're working on a project to improve the resiliency of the Laguna watershed. So we've earmarked some space in the western portion of this graphic. So I realize that was a lot. The question is, where do we go from here? And really, we're focused on community engagement for the next couple months. We launched a council in March. We're continuing to go to other city advisory bodies really through the end of May. And we'll conclude at the Sustainability Council Committee in early June. We will be releasing a survey in about a week and a half. We will be attending community events, doing some pop-ups along the waterfront, as well as hosting three open houses, two in person and one online, as well as doing direct Spanish engagement via our partners at the Promethoros Network. After we finish this big outreach push, we'll be then doing that technical analysis this summer, working towards analyzing all of these different ideas building towards a recommended strategy with a funding component, with an implementation component, with the goal of releasing a draft plan in 2027 and hope to be returned in front of council at least a year from now. For folks who want to get involved and learn more, the best approach is to visit our website. Sign up for the email list. We'll be sending out a big communication blast in about a week and a half to announce the survey being live as well as these upcoming open houses. We're also working on building out the schedule for the pop-ups and events, so that will all be on there. Hot off the presses is our information about the open houses. You are the first board and commission to know about this. We will be at the Faulkner Gallery on Wednesday, April 29th in the evening, and then the Maritime Museum the following day. We'll then have a virtual meeting during the lunch hour the following week, that first week of May 6th. I'd love to talk to you or anybody else who has any ideas on how we can make this the best project we possibly can. My contact info is shown on the screen here. To help guide your discussion today, we have a series of questions for you. The first is, are we generally headed in the right direction with all the things we've chatted about? Are there other things we need to consider and look at in this next analysis phase? What are we missing? What key questions do you want answered when we do this technical analysis? And do you have any initial thoughts on phasing and timing for these different types of projects? And that concludes my presentation. Thank you for your time.

Thank you for the frank and comprehensive presentation. So that takes us to comments from members of the public pertaining to this specific item. Ms. Carman, do we have any?

Thank you, Chair Boss. At this time, we still don't have anyone in the room with us. We don't have anyone online, and we didn't receive any written correspondence for this item. So I'll give it back to you.

Great. So I appreciate we have the discussion questions up on the slide up. I think it would be efficient if we first ask clarifying questions, and then we'll move into feedback and guided by those discussion questions. So just clarifying questions now as opposed to have you thought about doing this, we'll save that for the feedback discussion. So first we'll ask if you have any questions, and I see Commissioner Barnwell first.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Some of my questions, I think, end up, I'll be brief in them and then I'll come back, I think, in my comments. But I'm curious if there is a biological solution to some of these problems, rather than hardscape landscape, which I didn't hear a discussion of. Also, a question of the creek deltas that bring down sand. How is that sand or can that sand be incorporated into expanding our beaches? The issue came up two weeks ago about the protection of the shallow water marine environment. I presume that that falls on you guys, but I don't see any discussion here in that. And by that I mean when we talk about fishing, the pier has a lot of fishermen on it. And the fish have disappeared to a great extent over the last 20 years. So how is this plan looking at the underwater component of what we're doing? And is that legitimately part of what you're doing? I think it would be because we keep using the phrase recreation, and fishing is a big part of recreation. Are those things in? Turn this into a question. Are those the kinds of things you're thinking about? to add or, because I don't see them in here.

Honorable Chair and Commissioner Barnwell, thank you for all those questions. We definitely intend to include nature-based elements to all the solutions we're talking about here. With some preliminary conversations with our consultant, we really view those as additive. We can do things like, you know, do offshore kelp forests. We can do some dune restoration. We can do some living seawall-type elements that build habitat. At the end of the day, we'll still need some sort of hard protection to prevent the inland flooding component of things. We'll need that backstop regardless. And if we pursue a lot of these things, they will probably be done in some sort of hybrid component. So we very much intend to pursue that as sort of like an additive layer to the ultimate solution. But it's a piece of the puzzle, if that makes sense. And then for the creek question about sediment moving down through that, we I might defer to Ms. Hedrick on that one.

Chair Abrax, Commissioner Bardemill, Melissa Hedrick, Adaptation and Resilience Manager. There is actually a separate effort going on countywide to look at sediment removal that the county and other jurisdictions do within our creeks and where we can deposit that sediment. that material to make it a beneficial use for our beaches. And so the city is part of that study. We are interested in making sure that our sand makes it all the way down. And so that is another related effort to this. But one of the things we will be looking at is how anything we do on the waterfront either requires additional sand or changes how sand's coming out of the rivers or how the river mouths are changing. And then what was your last question? Oh, and then we will be modeling. So we have a whole sediment model and model of how things are changing along the waterfront. And so for each adaptation option, there will be technical analysis showing what happens when we put in, say, a groin or move the shoreline. And so that will show different sediment levels over time and how things might build up in certain areas and things like that. So that would inform how certain habitats and things could change, but we're not specifically doing a habitat change analysis. But I think that that's a good comment if you have that.

Thank you. Well, in that same arena, we have stopped grooming the beach. which we used to do from Leadbetter all the way to the Clark Estate. And we've stopped doing it in the area of the mouth of Mission Creek to allow for that lagoonish thing to occur and those plants. But we do still groom in other places. Now, I know there's a balance between tourists. But have you done any studies or have you thought about what it would mean to groom less in certain areas? And in the doing of that, finding some vegetation or some vegetation revetment against the ocean. Because that's the thing, when I look at all the other coastal areas, much of the revetment against the ocean tends to be natural. It isn't just a seawall. And so that was my question about how we could expand that investigation a little bit more, and what it would mean, and if we could do it. Because of our experiences with the CEQA discussion two weeks ago, it's our responsibility to protect that shallow water marine environment. And what we're talking about here has not addressed it at all. And I don't know how what we are doing would or would not affect them. So that would be my question. Are we going to look at that? Because I want to come down kind of heavy on that one.

Honorable Chair and Commissioner Barnwell, I think that's a great element that relates to number four, which are what's the key questions you want to answer in that follow-on analysis, and we can see how it impacts all the things you're talking about.

Okay. Well, that was a question I won't do anymore. Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you. Additional clarifying questions? Commissioner Bauke.

Two questions. One, is there going to be a cost estimate that goes with this program and Question one. And question two, is there going to be a financing plan to go with the process?

Honorable Chair and Commissioner Bakke, I appreciate the question, and the answer is yes, absolutely. So as part of where we are in this process now, we're trying to figure out what ideas are worth spending the resources on to do all these follow-on technical analyses. Probably the most important one is how we're going to actually pay for all these things. So when we release the draft plan, included in that will be a costing component, like order of magnitude costing component, as well as a funding strategy to figure out how we're actually going to do all this stuff. So we're early in the process in that we don't have that information yet, but it will be one of the key things we're going to answer in that next project phase.

Thank you. That's my clarifying questions.

Great. And if I also might add one thing to that, what's cool about this project is that it's more than just a planning exercise. Included within our existing grant funds and consultant contracts is doing preliminary construction drawings for targeted core measures. So we will continue through this project momentum to do things as part of this. And the quick wins are envisioned to be done with existing money that we've already held in city reserves. So certainly we'll need outside fundings and creative strategies, but there are elements of this that are already funded or in motion post the plan being adopted. Thank you.

Thank you. Commissioner Wiscombe. Thank you. Excuse me. Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you for the presentation. It was great. When I went over this, I'm just really concerned about or I don't know if concerned is the word, but I was puzzled by the fact that there's waterfront improvements and they're not related really to mitigation for coastal erosion and flooding and sea level rise. So I'm trying to grapple with why there's things, enhancements in there like the striping a new path which I totally support, but striping a new path in the West Harbor area to connect to where you join it in the harbor and back to Leadbetter. Why are those things in there? Were they always part of the goal of this plan?

Commissioner Wiscombe, that's a good question. So where things are related and where we can tackle them at the same time, we've included them in the plan. So there's not space now for a separate bike path without, say, removing parking or putting it on the sand. And so that was really folded in pretty early on because our project could also affect parking and be in the same location. And we are looking at options that could combine or have multi-benefits, such as having the bike path raised, so it's also a flood control device. So to the extent that we can make improvements to the waterfront and make it even better at the same time that we're doing our projects, we're looking at that. We're also looking at the fact that By improving public access and coastal-dependent uses in several areas, we can also have a better package altogether that has the balancing aspects needed for permitting and funding. And so we really are looking at those multi-benefit solutions. And for instance, on West Beach, making it a beach that people are using because we are going to lose the other beaches. They are all related, but if you have any comments related to that of things that you think are kind of left field, please let us know.

Okay, thank you. I just, I think, well, I would, yeah, you know, one of the core, on page four, one of the core measures to start permitting now is, The last bullet has language like expanding services for boating and commercial uses and creating new revenue opportunities that help fund waterfront improvements. And I'm wondering if we're getting conflicting if you're applying for grants, if the grant providers aren't going to say, well, what does this have to do with mitigating for erosion, coastal flooding, and sea level rise? So, you know, I'm feeling like it's just mixed in there.

Commissioner Wiskum, that's another really good question. several of these measures actually remove revenue generation. So parking is a revenue generating for the waterfront in addition to lease spaces. And so we're really looking at, hey, if we have to remove parking to move back the beach in Ledbetter, where can we replace that revenue so that the waterfront can keep operating? But also how are we going to pay for all this stuff over time? Because this is just kind of the beginning of a multi-phased approach at the waterfront. And so that's the purpose of the revenue generation. It's also, since that we're looking at the general uses along the waterfront, because we're talking about reducing the space available at the waterfront, there is somewhat looking at prioritization of uses. How much parking do we really need? And so that's where... kind of like revisioning spaces or keeping that in mind for later is kind of tagged in some areas, not that we'll be immediately building all these revenue generating things, but again, in order to fund the project and also to keep our operations going, it's something that we need to think about.

Okay, we need to think about revenue generating. Okay, okay, I guess I get that. I think that needs to be, as a comment, needs to be a little bit clearer that, in the report in terms of, because when I looked at this, I looked at it as why are these improvements that have nothing to do with mitigating for sea level rise in here? And so, okay, we'll move on from that. I appreciate, Ms. Hetrick, I appreciate your answers to that. So, Mr. Bolton, you referenced a parking study that was done, right? So there are excess spaces at the waterfront in the lots?

Honorable Chair and Commissioner Wiscombe, in the Harbor Main parking lot, yes.

Is that Harbor West, or is that the main one that's directly in front of?

The main one's the one where you enter the parking lot, you make a left, and then it goes up.

Yeah, okay, yeah.

And there's actually some excess parking everywhere in the harbor based on the study we did, but there was more there than anywhere else.

Okay. So when you go to – can you go to slide 31? Some of these are in the weeds, and some of them are – sorry about that. But number four, convert unused area to parking. So I was confused about that. Is that at Leadbetter? Or where is that –

Honorable chair and Commissioner Wiscombe. Thank you for the question on there It's it's hard to see in this graphic and with any luck you can see my mouse but over here There's this kind of excess right-of-way area that's between Shoreline Drive and the existing parking lot that comes in here It's hard to see it in this graphic But if you've ever drive down Shoreline Drive look right and you'll see there's this wide paved area that just has these large planters at random intervals so the idea would be we basically increase our the width or depth of the parking lot here to capture that space and then provide additional all these parking spaces more or less along here are shifted back and added relative to what's today okay so that's what we mean by that okay great um okay and um there's one correction in your report I was going to ask you what a headline is but I looked at the word I thought

I can't find a definition. So just in the report it should be headline, which I figured out in your presentation. Let's see. So I'm a little bit conflicted about your approach to West Beach. I understand that that's going to be the premier sandy beach, but I just worry about a message that you're sending to add amenities such as a restroom and showers to West Beach when the other areas you want to move the facilities inland. That's one of your objectives. So can you address that a little bit? Or perhaps maybe it would be better to address it as you move on, because that kind of had a red light for me. Why are we saying that's okay when it's not okay at Leadbetter and other facilities that will have to be relocated?

Honorable Chair and Commissioner Wiscombe, it's a great question and really it just comes down to how at risk that area is from hazards and really the big one is from a coastal erosion standpoint. So when we look at that modeling, we see that West Beach is gonna be really wide for a really long time. Any of the places we're looking about adding new stuff to, we'd be doing that in areas that we don't think are at risk of being eroded into anytime soon. And so that's the big difference from there versus Leadbetter, East Beach especially. In general, the goal is very much any infrastructure improvements we're doing, we wanna do it in a way that's as far out of the hazard zone as possible and we're not adding risky infrastructure that's gonna get destroyed.

Okay, okay. That would probably be good to emphasize that more about West Beach then. Okay, and let's see.

um so what options have you did you previously considered that you've eliminated from what we're seeing honorable chair and commissioner wiscum really it's been the honing in for specific areas so you know as i mentioned there's one option is you just build a seawall along our entire waterfront so that We started and we looked at the whole spectrum of things and that was an option. And then we started to look at the trade-offs and then more or less whittled down that as not a viable option anywhere except for the greater harbor commercial area. So that's one example. We've looked at a bunch of other things that are still sort of in question with these concepts of like where do you actually locate the bike path. There's ongoing conversations about keeping it as close to the water as possible and moving it inland so it doesn't have to be as tall. We've looked at like At one point, there was a bigger conversation about potentially redoing the breakwater, and at least the initial conversations are that doing a wave screen may be way more cost effective. So there's been some little things like that along the way. It's really been trying to refine the spectrums to be most appropriate for the specific areas, if that makes sense. Looks like Ms. Hedrick has something to add.

Yeah, Commissioner Wiscombe. We also have been and are continuing to think about whether or not things like groin and headlands are better sooner or later. Our initial thoughts are that these core measures are likely needed either way, even if we put in those. And as you know, those can be quite controversial. So you can spend a lot of time spinning your wheels on a project like that. And so we're really trying to focus on what is actually needed in the next 30 years while looking toward the future. But that's also something we're looking at. We have gotten a lot of questions like, why haven't we considered raising Cabrillo Boulevard or relocating Cabrillo Boulevard? And as you know, as part of the Seal of Arise adaptation plan, we did take that 100-year look at options. And the focus of this effort is really that time period when our waterfronts more or less the way it is now suffer with some changes as far as uses. but before the time period where we need large scale changes to the city that might be needed that would involve a lot more protection. And so we're really keeping the focus on the core measures south of Cabrillo Boulevard, except for where we need replacements of things. Like if we need additional parking or because we're removing parking, but we are not at this time looking at raising Kerbil Boulevard or rerouting it. Because from our perspective, these projects would be needed first anyways. And so just that's kind of the way we're thinking about it, but again, open to comments on the process.

Okay, and when we did the sea level rise adaptation plan, are you doing work with Goleta and CARP or coordinating with them on on this plan? Because I think I recall when I was on that committee, and I think I recall that they're impacted by what we do. Isn't that correct? CARP would be, right? Is that right?

Yes, Commissioner Wiscombe, that's exactly right. I mean, the areas, we are impacted by our own actions. If we were to put a headland at Ladbetter, it would affect sand supplies to East Beach. So yes, we are all affected, particularly down coast areas. And we all want to work together. So, yes, we are closely coordinating with our with our neighboring partners. Good.

OK. And are they are they at the same kind of stage that you are? Are you kind of leading the effort?

Honorable Chair and Commissioner Wiscombe, I think as a community, Santa Barbara is out ahead of a lot of places in California and that we already have that comprehensive longer term look at sea level rise through our citywide adaptation plan. And then we're now implementing it. of which this is one of the highest priority actions that came out of that project. So there are some other communities that are in a similar place down south, Oceanside, there's some others, but we're ahead of most communities in addressing sea level rise. That being said, as Ms. Hedrick said, we are in close coordination with our adjacent partners, and some things like the sediment management work, we're in direct coordination with, which certainly affects us all.

Good, thank you for that. I think that pretty much covers all I have at this point. Oh, just one more, I had one more question. Oh, yeah, okay. I think that, Under the core measures to start permitting now, you talk about, and I've said this before, expanding services for boating and commercial uses and creating new revenue opportunities to help fund the waterfront improvements. Do you have specific examples of this at this point? Because you do say start permitting now. So I'm just wondering if there are specific examples of the opportunities to... to create new revenue for the waterfront, if that's...

Honorable Chair and Commissioner Wiscombe, in terms of improving the boating experience, we've heard clear demand to improve the launch ramp area. That's been something that's come up also in the sort of western or western portion of the harbor commercial areas where they do a lot of the work on the like the dry boat work. And so looking at ways to expand that facility because there's they quite frankly need more space than they have today. So that those are some of the reconfiguration things we're looking at. Those though would be part of the core measures when we're reconfiguring uses so that wouldn't we'd start. This next phase is when we would go into the details of what this would look like for permitting. So we have some initial ideas, but we'll have more details when we release the draft plan.

Okay. I just, as a comment, I'm not supposed to comment right now, but as a comment, I think you need, this is a really general core measure. I think you maybe need to... add some specifics to it, even, you know, if they don't become realities, just so people understand what that is.

So, thank you, Madam Chair.

I'm done.

Thank you. Vice Chair DiLuccio?

Okay, thank you. You did a great job, you guys, on this, and I've been following it on city council and everything, so this is great. So, you're using a consultant to do this. What is the background of the consultant? What experience does he have? I mean, he has, obviously, experience, but what's his work with other cities or in California?

Honorable Chair and Commissioner Delucio, so we have a multidisciplinary consulting team. Stantec is the prime consultant on this, and they're supported by Environmental Science Associates, ESA, Bionic, CRC, Coastal Recreation Consultants, as well as Summit Environmental. ESA has been involved with quite a number of our projects since the very beginning, including doing the technical modeling work for our citywide sea level rise adaptation plan. Bionics brought a great experience from the landscape and public outreach side of things. And then Stantec has a local office here and also has at least countrywide, but maybe beyond that scope too, from doing coastal engineering. So they're a big corporate firm with a really deep deck and some great staff members on that team. So there's a strong background from everyone on our team in doing this type of work.

And I can see that's from what you're producing here. So basically right now you've done, there's been analysis and modeling done, and you've collected data and all that, and you're outreaching. So there's no plan yet. You just have the analysis and the modeling and information like this you're presenting to us right now, correct?

Yeah, Honorable Chair and Commissioner DeLucio, you're absolutely right. This outreach process is a bit earlier than oftentimes things come to you. We wanted to do this initial phase of outreach before things were too fully baked because it takes a lot of resources to do all the technical analysis on all this stuff. What's cool about this project is based on the model we created, we'll be able to do an intervention. explore the growing idea. We put that growing in, how does it change the beach? How does it change the risk? How does it do this, that, and the other thing? And so right now we're just trying to figure out what things are worth spending those resources on so we're not spinning our wheels when we come back and have way more of the details of what's in this thing. So that's why the questions here are a bit higher level of just like, does it seem like we're headed in the right direction? And if we're missing anything or things are out of left field, let us know so we can not look at them.

So these are... Using city dollars or are they coming from the enterprise zone, the dollars for this project?

Honorable Chair and Commissioner Delucio, I appreciate that question. This project is primarily funded through grant funding. So we have grants from the California Coastal Commission and the California Coastal Conservancy. They are funding the entirety of the consultant contract as well as a good amount of the staff time for city staff working on this project. The city is also contributing monies in the form of in-kind staff dollars to support this work effort because we have a big interdepartmental staff team working on this. We have a great core team as well as a broader city team with representation from our parks and rec department, from our waterfront department, from planning. It's a big list.

So in other words, when you structure the actual plan that we will see, It'll be structured in a way where it will allow, make it easy, and I think Commissioner Wiscombe alluded to this, to get funding the way the plan is positioned.

Yes, I would also just note that it's important that we kind of package it all together for permitting purposes, too, because to the extent we're putting in hard infrastructure and the need to restore areas to balance it out, et cetera, is important and getting back to the point that Commissioner Wiscom brought up, really permitting anything new at the waterfront right now is really difficult with regard to coastal permitting because it's hard to make the safety findings going out in time without a plan for what we're doing. because of sea level rise. And so really to get any new project permitted out there requires this type of planning now. And so some of the projects you see in there are just coming immediately after this because they couldn't quite propose what they were going to propose without this bigger analysis of what's going to come. And so that's why kind of more and more things kind of keep packaged into this project, because they're waiting on this analysis to be able to get permitted, if that makes sense.

And you'll have, when the plan is put together, there'll be a page of objectives and stuff, because the thing I don't see here right now is, obviously, I understand why we're doing this, besides it's a public safety issue, it's for health, safety reasons, and also it's to preserve our environment, and also for tourists, and for the pleasure of the residents, so I see the things about enhancing stuff so far we're talking about, and I know the execution is alluding to the way you're doing it is to preserve and safety measures. My takeaway is that, but I think it needs to be spelled out perhaps more into the actual plan that you produce. This is a 30-year plan. So you'll have quick is this quick the quick fixes and in the core measures is that that leads up to the 30 years the core measures?

honorable chair and Commissioner Delucio Yes, the goal is that any measures were putting in from the core measures provide at least 30 years of protection if not more They will take a bit of time to permit to fund to build But that is the goal.

Yes that they provide 30 years of protection and then will the when you put the plan together I imagine there'll be a intervals where you'll be reviewing the plan? Yes, absolutely. With all of this, there'll be a phasing adaptive management component to all of this. Because I'm sure over the 30 years, a lot of technology is going to change. And also, so there'll be flexibility built into the plan, in other words.

Honorable Chair and Commissioner Delucio, yes, that's correct.

Then just a couple more questions. It's interesting, the east versus a west beach, the erosion and... So you will be balancing out, the approach will be balanced out where the fixes need to be made in the plan. It sounds like the East Beach is going to need a lot more work than the West Beach.

Yeah, Commissioner Delicio, the reason for that is that the harbor breakwater essentially traps sand and makes West Beach bigger over time. That's the only, even though people get confused because they're right next to each other, why it is that the beaches are so different. But that really is, it's really just because West Beach has the harbor breakwater in front of it. And so yeah, to the extent that we see, say, erosion of the volleyball courts at East Beach and can move some of them to West Beach, we're really looking at it as how can we replace park space that's lost? How can we replace the various uses that we might have to move?

Just two more questions. The relocation of assets you began to talk about, I know this is more input and things are going to change when it comes back to us and goes to the council. But in the harbor area, you were mentioning that you may consider maybe on some of the parking area to build a commercial. Is that because what's there now may need to be moved?

Honorable Chair and Commissioner DiLucio, Are you talking about the economic development stuff in the parking lot? Well, yeah, because you made a comment about how the parking lot, you could make it considerable. Sure, yeah. So that's primarily, it relates to Commissioner Wiscombe's comments and Ms. Hetrick's response to that about we're trying to find ways to... ensure that our operations and management of the greater waterfront remain solvent over time. So if we're taking things that generate revenue like parking and moving it elsewhere, we gotta make up for that in some ways. So the move there isn't really about directly hazard protection as it is to provide funding for both ongoing operations, but also all of these things are gonna cost a lot of money. And even with outside funding, we'll need some sort of city match. So to provide revenue streams internally to help do that.

Okay. And then final question is, which I'm intrigued by, is the elevated walking and bike path. Can you tell me a little more about that? What it will do and, you know, and how will, you know, how will it protect, you know, the beach and all that?

Honorable Chair and Commissioner DeLucio. Really the concept of the elevated walking and biking path, it's similar to like a living levy if you've heard that term. So it's providing a vertical measure that prevents water from being able to flood the inland areas. And really it's this idea of if we're going to make the transportation improvements, let's address flooding at the same time with the same multi-benefit thing. It'll help us get funding. It'll make it easier to permit. There's reasons to do these things together. Our idea is that the ultimate design we need to figure out, that will happen in the next phase. But it could be some sort of thing where you have like terracing and low angles and you build it so it feels like a park than just the separated levee function. So we're looking at how much space we have to do this combination type facility. But that's the idea, is more or less it serves as a levy to prevent water from the ocean impacting lower downtown and our inland neighborhoods in an elevated configuration, if that makes sense. Yes, it does.

Okay, thank you. Those are my questions, I guess.

Thank you. A couple clarifying questions. First, on slide 39, the Leadbetter storm drain relocation, where is it now?

Honorable Chair, what happens now is, so essentially before, oh, sorry, Leadbetter, I thought,

Yes, that's the right one.

Oh, you're talking about?

Excuse me, Chair Prowse, were you talking about West Beach? I'm sorry, yes, West Beach, I'm sorry. So right now, because West Beach didn't used to exist before the Harbor Breakwater was put in, the storm drains there, there used to not be a beach at all. So the water went all the way up to essentially where the bike path is. And so the storm drains actually end at the bike path and dump water at the beginning of the beach and essentially create a huge swimming pool of storm water where there's debris and it just hardens the sand and kind of mucks up the sand. And that's why it's a sub-ideal, in sub-ideal conditions. And so really the idea here is to redo the storm drain system to extend it, well concentrate it and extend it out so it's not just Discharging right on to the beginning of the beach.

Thank you. Now. I know why there's that area and then slide 42 There was an area for a parking garage and I couldn't quite tell where that was or what's there now?

Honorable chair that is the current Garden Street lot So that's on the corner of garden and Cabrillo and we probably should label that so that's a good point. Thank you.

Thank you. I And then a question about when the plan is further developed, will specific populations be considered? And I'm specifically thinking about our unhoused community members or people who are living in vehicles who might be living in the area and how they'll be affected by whatever plans are put forward.

Honorable Chair, I think that's something we can definitely include in this follow-on analysis. That's a good comment of things that you'd like to see answered when we do that.

Okay.

Thank you.

Thank you. Any other clarifying questions needed?

Yes.

Yes.

Commissioner Wiscombe.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Just one question. This has come up many times before, but the parking lot across from Leadbetter, over at City College, That I know that has a lease on it for City College leases that have have you looked into that in terms of utilizing that space or even reconfiguring it restriping it or something to get more parking in there or taking over some space there.

Honorable Chair and Commissioner Wiscombe that's the area we're looking at doing the multi-story parking garage on to really expand the number of spaces there. The city owns the actual land there, and then we have a joint use agreement with City College for management and use of that lot. So we're exploring options there. It's an initial idea. We haven't met with them yet. We will be soon to start those conversations to see what folks want to see there. But we can also look. Yeah, to see if without doing a multi-story, if there's ways to get more spaces by re-striping that area. We can certainly look at that.

It's kind of a, I don't know, puzzle of spaces now. So it might be looked at in terms of making it more efficient.

Absolutely. Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you. So I know you got a little bit of feedback there with some of our questions. But we'll move to the discussion questions. So around design direction, additional options, priorities and trade-offs, key questions for analysis and timing and phasing. I think we'll try to summarize our comments at the end as well. So we'll start with Commissioner Bauke.

I'll just go through the list. First off, very good presentation. I'm glad you're looking at this very, very comprehensive presentation. and looking at both dealing with the environmental hazard issues, but there are other things that the Coastal Commission will be looking for at the same time in their policy framework, and I see you trying to find that mesh, and you're doing a good job of it. So I don't have any concerns with what you're proposing. I think you're on the right framework. Additional options, I've been racking my mind IS TO DIFFERENT OPTIONS. I THINK WE MIGHT WANT TO BE A LITTLE BIT MORE AGGRESSIVE ON THE SAND RETENTION SIDE OF THINGS, IF THE HEADLINES AT LEAST IS TO THE EXTENT, BECAUSE I THINK THAT'S THE KEY THING, IS IF THERE IS NO BEACH, AT LEAST SANDY BEACH, WE SORT OF LOSE OUR WE'LL CALL IT MARKETING POSITION WITH OTHER COMMUNITIES. And as I mentioned before, financing and cost estimates and all that sort of an interactive thing, but I think at the same time we need to understand that this is a pretty heavy lift at the end of the day. Now whether or not the city of Santa Barbara wants to follow Portland with some kind of climate tax or something or pollution tax to our friends of the petrochemical industry who are creating this problem. We'll leave that to the council and a policy question, but I think there's definitely a need to come up with some kind of funding mechanism that's tied to the causation that we're dealing with. As to additional thoughts and I would say the heavy lift of the elevated levy, multimodal system, you're sort of getting two things at once. We should really focus on the feasibility of that real soon, because I think that's the one item that you have here that can make the biggest change, both from a hazard protection standpoint and as somebody that spends many formative years in the South, levees are a thing that's used in lots of the country to deal with situations of flooding. The problem is that sometimes you don't want the situation that there's water on the wrong side of the levee. So that's a very complicated thing, but we don't want to create a bathtub, too. But I think you're on the right track, and I look forward to the work that you're pursuing, and I think you've made good steps on this one. Thank you.

Thank you. Commissioner Barnwell.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Yes, I want to echo all those remarks about how truly wonderful this is to tackle this project. That beach stretch in terms of all the things you can do and then the average person's interface with the environment is literally the lungs of our entire town. And so it's essential, and I know you know this, that we look at all of the components of it We talk about parking and we talk about sand, but we haven't talked about the lawn. And I go down there five or six times a week. I walk down there. And the lawn that's over on East Beach is used repeatedly for soccer games. And the lawn to the East Beach side of Stearns Wharf is where we have our art shows. And the lawn... over on Leadbetter Beach is also a huge component of the public experience of going to the beach. I say that because I think a missing ingredient in here is just, I'll use the general term, it's probably not the correct one, landscaping. And I want to say one more time the underwater environment as well as the above water environment. I happened to be on this planning commission years ago when a study was done by scuba divers at the end of Stearns Wharf. And it was horrific at how there were no kelp beds and the fish were disappearing. And I think if we could make an analogy, what if all the palm trees disappeared? We'd go, oh my God, we need to focus on that. We don't see the underwater, so we really don't know what's going on there. But this seems to me like a perfect time to begin to incorporate an awareness of that. Because we are talking, we are using phrases of recreation and working, a working harbor and a recreational place. And that undersea environment is a huge component of that. So I would suggest that we give it a little more biological look rather than just simply an engineering hardscape, although the engineering hardscape, of course, is super important. I agree with my esteemed commissioner, Ms. Wiscombe, who said that some components of your report don't seem to directly fit into how we're handling the water intrusion issue. And then you explained adequately that they're part of a fundraising process that will help us pay for these things. Specifically, I think she mentioned the little area next to the west side of West Beach where you're going to put in some. So in the writing of the report, if you can separate these out, you know, we're going to do this, but then look to support that, so that the report itself reads in some logical way as to, what your focuses are. Using that beach frequently, I think putting some commercial right along there would be a really great thing to do because it's filled with volleyball players and they're all looking for some place to get a hot dog or a cup of coffee and there isn't anything unless they walk for 500 feet. There's a hole in the pier. at the very far end where you can look down to the pilings. I have vivid memories of that being covered with starfish. There's not starfish one on those pilings. I can remember little kids and tourists pointing to them. That's the kind of thing that I think relates to what are we watching, how are we caretakers for that underwater environment, because it has changed so dramatically. I think also if we can look at how the deltas of these creeks. Oh, another question. When I went to Honolulu, I was shocked at how the texture of the sand changed as I walked along Waikiki Beach. And some of it, being a general contractor, some of it felt like construction sand. And it turned out it was. It turns out they drive trucks out there and they dump sand on Waikiki Beach to keep the ocean from coming in too close to the Moana Hotel. Have we ever thought about trucking in sand or doing something like that is also a potential?

Honorable Chair and Commissioner Barnwell, yes, that's definitely a part of this and that would be in the broad category of beach nourishment, one of the mechanisms to do that is by truck. The challenge is depending on the volumes that can be very expensive and very carbon intensive too. So if you're doing a bigger project with a lot of nourishment, oftentimes we end up doing it by barge instead of by truck. But yes, that's absolutely a portion of the toolbox and something we're looking at. Thank you.

Thank you. And I don't think I have any more, Madam Chair. I just also want to say I I greatly appreciate you coming to us in this formulative phase of this thing. We can give you some, and everyone, the community and everyone else, give you some heads up on the topic so that when you do finally draw up this report, you've really reached out and got a hold of everything. Thank you very, very much.

Thank you.

Commissioner Westcombe. Thank you, Madam Chair. Okay. Thank you very much. I also agree that... I appreciate your coming to us at this stage of the process. So number one, initial concerns. I've been over it, I think, and I think Commissioner Barnwell just mentioned it too. We need a better explanation of integrating the mitigation with creating new revenue opportunities for expanding services and boating and commercial uses. You do talk about that a little bit on your website under waterfront adaptation. And it's just one long sentence. But enhance recreation, commerce, beach access, habitat, and critical infrastructure. I think that's a sentence, but you just need to go into a little more detail. So the dots are really well connected, if that makes sense. And then number two, I think it was Commissioner Bauke. No, who talked about Mission Creek? Was that, that was you? Yeah. Okay. That was Commissioner Barnwell. I didn't see anything in there about that, but I think there should be some sort of, do you want to respond to that or?

Yes, Commissioner Wiscombe. We are making sure that we're not causing any impacts to how Mission Creek and Laguna function. One of the concerns that has been raised is because if the beach berm at the Mission Laguna outlet and the Sycamore one gets too high, it can actually cause inland flooding.

Right.

And so one of the things we'll be looking at when we look at these different interventions is how it might build up the beach in different locations and trying to make sure that that doesn't happen. In general, we're kind of reserving that area to be studied further, later, mostly because we are doing that Laguna resiliency study. So really looking at flood control and restoration options with the Laguna watershed, which is really the source of a lot of our nuisance flooding right now during rainfall events. And we don't have those options yet. So we just don't want to design that area without knowing what's going to be needed for that area. So really what we have in there right now is just kind of placeholder. We haven't done any big visioning exercise for that area. But we are hoping that it can be improved in the future and restored visually as well as habitat.

Okay. Thank you for that. Okay. And then Commissioner Barnwell talked about lawns. I think that's important. There's a lot of places where people picnic and stuff like that, and I think you should bring that up in your report in terms of the impact that some of these measures will have to the lawn areas at our beaches, because they're very well used all the time. Number four, key questions you want answered in the detailed follow-on analysis. The core measure in the harbor commercial area of expanding services for boating and commercial uses and creating more revenue opportunities to help fund improvements, I think that needs to really be expanded on. A key question is, what are these projects that you're talking about? What are these new revenue opportunities? You give us a couple examples of that, okay? And I don't have any thought on phasing. I think that's something that you leave to the experts because there's funding, there's permitting, there's timing, there's a whole bunch of things that go into that. Two, would like to see more exploration on an artificial reef. I know that these have been done in other communities. I know up in the state of Washington, one of my friends actually, who's a landscape architect, did one. And I know that, I think the commercial fishermen have talked about that, but it would be good to coordinate with that and have a look at that. And I hope that you are involving groups like the commercial fishermen of Santa Barbara in, in this effort. Um, and I just, as a last comment, um, I agree with commissioner Baki about sand retention and also, um, emphasizing beach nourishment within our budget constraints. Um, but I thank you for, for bringing this to us. And, um, I hope that we've been helpful to you and we wish you luck in the future.

You're doing a great job.

No, you really are. This come along. I remember seeing you down at the, down at the Harbor that day, doing the talking to people all day about it. So it's great. Thank you. Thank you. Vice chair, delete you.

I don't think you need luck. I think you're doing a great job on this. And, um, Number one, options, you're heading in the right direction. I don't have any initial concerns. Number two, additional options should be evaluated. I think my fellow commissioners touched on that a little bit. Missing objectives or priorities, I realize the plan is going, you're collecting data now, then you'll flush it out, then you put a plan together. because I'm not really, I just want to be sure when we do the objectives that it's laid out right now, I'm getting, taking away from this, obviously, I know there's safety concerns here, but that's not really coming through to me here. It's me, I'm getting, I'm reading from this objectives like economics to pay for it. I'm reading things like enhancements, speech enhancements. I'd like to see maybe more fleshed out, you know, the public safety aspect of it, the human safety, portion of it and also the public environment and how this is to protect this as an environmental resource. So I'd just like to see things like that. I think that'll probably come out when you flesh it all out in the objectives. And then number four and five, well, just my other thoughts would be obviously when you put the plan together, you already mentioned it'll be a flexible plan. I mean, flexible in the sense of you're predicting where we're gonna need to put the efforts, but something, an emergency or something can come up where the flexibility needs to come in and you need to go maybe from East Beach to West Beach. And also funding options, which we haven't seen that yet, but I'm sure that'll be in here too, and the way this plan's structured, where we can take advantage of but you do a great job on grants, but we can take, you know, get funding for this, because if we don't get federal funding or state funding, it's going to be really, we'll be in a really difficult situation. So, and then obviously you've mentioned Spanish engagement you're going to be doing on this as well. And again, you're going to be reviewing this on intervals, because I know a lot of new technology is going to come along over the years. And so anyway, those are my thoughts. Thank you very much.

Great, thank you. A couple of additional comments from me in terms of design direction. If you're restriping the first row of parking, I'd agree to protecting or elevating it. So I think we've heard about the elevated levee. we've talked about the financing a bit but i think emphasizing the cost comparison i think it i was struck by the three million dollars a year to respond to this um as opposed to it might be more but it's a long-term solution to its real adaptation so i think emphasizing that for the public is helpful when we see big dollar signs um also emphasizing the um i think i forget which slide it was but i think it was the goals of like save the sandy beach versus the seawall solution was helpful. So making sure to include that in the actual plan. And then I mentioned specific populations as well. So I'm thinking about, again, folks who are living unsheltered, who are especially affected. And I'm in particular thinking about one of the storms we had in the last few years where The Veterans Memorial Building on Cabrillo was an emergency shelter warming center for the day because that's where people were so they could walk there. But me having to deliver water and food there was a big challenge because I couldn't drive there. So how are we planning for people who are living unsheltered in the area that's affected who are seeking shelter in that area? And then how are we also planning for people who have to deliver emergency food to those areas? I think those specific vulnerable populations are always important to include. If there is no other feedback, then I'll do my best to summarize. That's OK. I'll try. All right. And these may move around between question one and four. But I think under design direction, we talked about an elevated levy. Appreciating early engagement in this process. Important to acknowledge and emphasize safety concerns and multilingual engagement. Under additional options, consider being more aggressive with sand retention headlands. Include lawn or landscaped areas and their recreational or other uses. Consider the underwater environment from kelp to starfish to artificial reef. Consider economic development or food service in areas where it's not currently available. Need an analysis of impacts from and on creeks, so Creek Delta's Mission Creek. Look at beach nourishment, trucking or barging in sand, and involve commercial fisher people. and priorities and trade-offs, looking at the cost comparisons and the goals, and integrate mitigation with enhancing commerce, economic development, and voting. There are key questions for analysis, financing, including potentially climate, other kind of levy, cost estimates, harbor commercial revenue producing opportunities. Flexibility, so know what we're prioritizing, but make sure that we're building in flexibility in case of emergencies and consider specific vulnerable populations and emergency response. Then under timing and phasing, the elevated levee again, prioritizing sand retention and really deferring to experts on some of the recommendations for timing. Did I miss any key feedback? All right. So I don't think we need a motion. You just need a general feedback, correct?

Okay. No motion?

No.

But we like to do motions.

No action needed. It is listed as a discussion item. Well, thank you again for your time. Really appreciate the early engagement and the thoughtful way that you're going about this. So thank you. All right. And I'm... Because it's not an action, I don't think there's any appeal period, correct? Okay. All right. Well, then we will close that item. Thank you again for your time and effort. And we'll move on to our administrative portion of our agenda, beginning with the committee and liaison reports. Staff hearing officer liaison.

I'm going to spare you this week, and next week I'll have a couple of reports, HLC and HS staff hearing officer reports, unless our esteemed secretary wants to give one.

Well, the meeting last week wasn't very eventful, but the meeting next week will be. Yes, it will be. You'll have feedback from that.

Yes, it will be on the Melpis project.

Great. Commissioner Barnwell, for other liaison reports.

I just wanted to remind everybody that there's going to be a State of the Cities conference at what I mistakenly call the Red Lion, but I think it's the Hilton, right? The Hilton Hotel. So, in case you can go. Thank you. Okay.

I will interject there that I understand that we'll be getting some announcements or updates about permit streamlining at State of the Cities. So looking forward to that.

Tomorrow.

Any other committee or liaison reports? Discussion on subcommittees and workshops. So I think we've discussed this in the past, But if there is a request for workshops, you can send that to staff. For example, we've had a training on the planning process. We've asked about legislative updates. This fall, we'll have an annual progress report and update on the housing element. We've got a report on Brown Act. But if there are other requests, please do send those to staff. Any final comments? Commissioner Barnwell.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you, Madam Chair. We've talked about this planning commission looking at issues related to housing and an inventory of city property and things like that, right? And did we also mention the idea that we need to realize that we've lost planning tools when it comes to downtown development and we need to maybe have some kind of an awareness of what tools are left to us because there are no longer parking requirements, for example, state height limitations, et cetera, differ. I think that's something that would be worthy of a little gathering of eagles.

Thank you. And we do have that noted under legislative updates, the impact of legislation such as no parking. So, yes, to be continued in one of the future workshops. Any other comments for today? If not, it is now 2.39, and that concludes our April 9th, 2026 Planning Commission hearing. Our next meeting is tentatively scheduled for April 16th, 2026. Thank you.