Sand on our beaches
The continuing deterioration of our beaches is simply not acceptable.Our quality of life and the success of downtown redevelopment are contingent on the beaches being in prime condition. The design life of the last two sand nourishment projects in Oceanside was five years for each project. Without designing sand retention systems into the projects the sand will be gone as quickly as it takes to get the project planned, approved, and permitted.
SANDAG studies have shown the benefits of a healthy, stable beach will increase income to the city, protect the public and private property along the beach, and stabilize the wildlife habitat that shares our beaches with us. Beaches serve as a soft seawall against rising sea levels, and pay for themselves over time from increased tourist revenue.
Other cities in California are taking advantage of using sand retention systems for these very reasons. Oceanside must follow their example if we are to truly be “San Diego’s North Shores.” The Harbor and Beaches Advisory Committee has proposed to the City Council that a coastal engineer be put on retainer to develop a plan to find a permanent solution to the problem. There’s just not enough sand or money available to the city to sustain our beaches on a continuing basis without the use of sand retention structures. Our quality of life and the investments we are making downtown depend on it. If we are to realize the full financial benefit of placing sand on our beaches we must incorporate sand retention systems into the design.
Kevin T. Byrne, Chairman
Oceanside Harbor & Beaches
Re: Letter to the Editor
Leucadia has a fully-vetted, council-approved Streetscape plan that will improve the quality of life along our busy corridor, accommodating reasonable (and inevitable) growth, while still preserving the character of what makes our little piece of paradise so unique and homey; a new kind of funky.
Lynn Marr’s gadfly vision for the Leucadia 101 corridor? Oxcarts, no wheels. She speaks for a very vocal, but tiny minority so small that it would not even make a good tea party.
Anton C. Gerschler,
I watched the Oct. 9 Solana Beach City Council meeting online. Our council members were very outspoken and exposed the group pushing the Party Policy Initiative, as well as the very individuals that forced the special election. The council’s comments were timely and necessary! The public is now aware that the Party Policy group is using deceitful tactics to confuse voters and force the City Council to adopt the Initiative’s “my way or the highway” Party Policy for the Fletcher Cove Community Center.
In good faith, the City Council voted in a compromise policy this last summer that allows private parties at the Community Center. The compromise policy is reasonable and it is amendable. It takes into consideration the impacts on the surrounding neighborhood, safety of park and beach goers and it ensures access for visitors and residents to the Fletcher Cove area.
But the Initiative Sponsors have decided that they can run the city better than our elected officials. To that end, they are now using their ample financial resources (courtesy of an undisclosed private donor) to mount a public campaign to pressure the City Council into adopting their “my way or the highway” Party Policy. Our City Council unanimously agrees that the Initiative’s Party Policy is too extreme and that they and future councils must have the ability to modify city laws. Adopting this policy sets a terrible precedent.
Let’s not give a small group of well-funded individuals the power to take control of city governance. Imagine what this type of vigilante politics will have on Solana Beach in the future. The Initiative group forced the special election. Let them have their election. Please study the issue and know all the facts before you vote.
James D. Burnett,