16 • Apr. 22 - May 5, 2016 • The Log


Public input continues for Long Beach Breakwater study


Corps of Engineers to take public comments on proj- ect through May 7.


By Parimal M. Rohit


LONG BEACH — City and federal offi cials continue to receive public input and make progress on a three- year feasibility study aiming to restore aquatic habitat off the Long Beach shore by altering or removing the nearby breakwater. Long Beach Mayor Robert Garcia hosted a community meeting April 7 to receive public input on the “East San Pedro Bay Ecosystem Restoration Feasibility Study,” which will assess how to restore aquatic infrastructure and increase habitat biodiversity along southeast Los Angeles County’s coast. City staff stated Long Beach and the


U.S. Army Corps of Engineers spent nearly seven years developing the $3 million feasibility study. Both agencies will spend the next three years gather- ing public input and studying scientifi c and technological advances in ecosys- tem restoration to determine the future of Long Beach’s offshore breakwater. “With this study we have the oppor- tunity to use advances in science and technology to identify an ecosystem restoration solution that can improve the overall health of the East San Pedro Bay, as well as protect our maritime partners at the Port of Long Beach,” Vice Mayor Suja Lowenthal said in a statement. An offi cial statement from Garcia’s


offi ce said the feasibility study has two goals: restoring habitat such as coastal wetlands, kelp, rocky reef and other marine life to support a diversity of local and migratory species; and, improving water circulation to sustain aquatic habitats. A Federal Register notice by the


Corps of Engineers added the feasibil- ity study will also explore recreational


opportunities but ecosystem resto- ration is the top priority. The Corps of Engineers could pursue alternative actions such as creating an under- water rocky reef for kelp beds just beyond the navi- gational channels or sandy islands to support eelgrass. There is a pos- sibility no action is taken and the breakwaters remain in place. Federal offi cials


The Long Beach Breakwater (far right) could become history (or at least a smaller version of itself) depending on how a three-year feasibility study plays out. The city of Long Beach and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers are jointly backing the study.


built three breakwa- ters off the Long Beach, Wilmington and San Pedro coasts between 1899 and 1949. Long Beach’s breakwater, the easternmost of the three structures, was built between 1940 and 1949. Surfrider Foundation’s Long Beach chapter is campaigning to have the breakwater, which takes up about 4,500 feet of water space, removed to help the city revisit its history as a surfi ng destination.


The foundation’s staff explained on


the webpage of its Long Beach chap- ter how the breakwater affects tidal fl ows and outlines the pros and cons of removing the coastal defense structure. “Since the breakwater was created,


Long Beach’s waterfront has deterio- rated,” foundation staff stated. “The natural fl ow of the ocean current and waves had previously assisted in keep- ing the beaches and waters in Long Beach free from stagnating pollutants. With the breakwater, urban runoff or stormwater from the Los Angeles River gets trapped within the harbor.” Reconfi guring the breakwater could


bring environmental and economic benefi ts to Long Beach, according to


Surfrider Foundation staff, including a healthier ecosystem, improved water quality, higher property values and tourism activity. Adverse effects include beach ero-


sion, particularly along the narrow stretch of land separating Alamitos Bay from the Pacifi c Ocean. Shoreline Marina would probably be the most impacted should the Long Beach Breakwater be diminished in size or removed since only open water exists between the recreational boat- ing venue and the coastal defense structure. Rainbow Harbor and Alamitos Bay


Marina both have landmasses protect- ing boaters from open water, although altering the breakwater would still impact how currents fl ow in and out of both venues. Catalina Express’s navigational


route from Rainbow Harbor to Avalon’s Cabrillo Mole currently passes in between the middle and east breakwaters. Long Beach city staff announced a


workshop would be scheduled soon to gather more public comment.


“The next opportunity for public comment will be a follow-up participatory workshop to elicit viewpoints on various habitat restoration measures, including breakwater modifi cations, with key stakeholder groups including residents, ports, marine biolo- gists and surfers,” city staff stated. “The pub- lic’s input will provide valuable insights into the development of potential study solu- tions. The date, time, and location of this meeting will be made available soon.”


The Corps of Engineers’ public comment period ends May 7, accord- ing to a Federal Register notice. Written comments can be submitted to Naeem Siddiqui at Naemm.A.Siddiqui@usace. army.mil by or before May 7. Visit 1.usa.gov/1VRwXMn to view the entire notice.


Any action taken would only affect the Long Beach Breakwater; the San Pedro and Middle breakwaters are not included in the feasibility study. A 2005 memorandum addressed to the Long Beach City Council stated residents have debated how a proposed breakwater reconfi guration would affect the Port of Long Beach, the local environment, and area residences or businesses for years. “Are there reasonable solutions to complications that may arise from reconfi guring the breakwater to bring natural tidal action back to Long Beach,” the memorandum asked of the city’s elected offi cials. The memorandum also pointed out the Long Beach Breakwater is federal property.


thelog.com


Support


By Supporting Our Advertisers


QUALIFIED TECHNICIANSWA Congratulations to The Log on the 1000th


WANTED issue!


thelog.com


Port of Long Beach photo


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52