|
news
Breakwater brings
controversy
By Jamie Rogers
On-line Forty-Niner
The federal breakwater
stretching from San Pedro to Seal Beach has been the subject
of debate among Long Beach residents for decades.
Built during World War II to protect the Navy fleet that was
parked in the Long Beach port, the breakwater has fractured
residents' opinions as firmly as the jetties fracture the
current.
One faction argues that the breakwater protects coastline
property, particularly that of the Alamitos Bay Peninsula,
from being damaged by storm-powered waves. Others argue that
the breakwater is still doing its original job - protecting
the harbor.
On the other side of the debate, residents and surfers argue
that removing the breakwater would bring back wave action
to the Long Beach shores, giving a boost to tourism. Environmentalists
argue that the breakwater acts as a plug, holding stagnant
water dumped into the shore of the Los Angeles and San Gabriel
rivers.
The issue was raised again at last week's city council meeting,
when Vice Mayor Dan Baker recommended the city ask the U.S.
Army Corp. of Engineers to study the environmental and economic
effect of reconfiguring the breakwater. The issue was squashed
when the proposal failed to receive a second motion.
"We didn't even get a vote," said Robert Palmer,
chairman of the Long Beach chapter of the Surfrider Foundation,
a major proponent for the study. Palmer said the Foundation
is not going to give up. "This doesn't mean a thing.
We weren't na•ve in thinking these leaders we have in
place right now are environmentally conscious enough to do
the right thing."
After learning that Baker was going to propose the issue,
Mayor Beverly O'Neill, a resident of the Alamitos Bay Peninsula,
met with a group from the Army Corp. of Engineers. They had
no interest in the study at this time, she said. She also
said she could not support the study due to the projected
cost.
Third District Councilman Frank Colonna, also a peninsula
property owner, said he is opposed to the study. In a letter
to the Press-Telegram, Colonna said the study would be a waste
of money when the city could benefit from other federal projects,
such as increased airport and seaport security.
Colonna said nearly all developments along the Long Beach
shoreline were designed to withstand the pressure of wave
action under the protection of the breakwater. He said he
is concerned that wave action or erosion without the breakwater
would damage these developments.
"Even with the breakwater in place, we spend thousands
of dollars annually replacing sand that migrates from the
peninsula toward Rainbow Harbor," Colonna wrote in his
letter.
Palmer contended that the main concern of the opponents of
the breakwater is study for the property on the peninsula.
"There is just a handful of peninsula residence that
have homes on the ocean side giving us trouble," Palmer
said. "There has been precedent set in other areas that
have breakwaters. Such as Kuhio Beach in Oahu on the south
side of Waikiki.
"There are plans, I don't know if they have done it yet
or are in the design stage, to reconfigure breakwater so there
is more circulation to promote sand build up on the beach
on that particular point," Palmer said. "Not only
are they adding sand on the beach, but they are improving
water quality. If the technology exists in Hawaii, I imagine
it would exist here."
Many of the council members said they could not vote for a
study on the breakwater at this time because they are concerned
for the port safety.
"Are we prepared to use taxpayer money for this study
when we have issues, from infrastructure to airport and now
port security, to deal with?" Colonna wrote. "The
breakwater plays a major security role for our city now. It
acts as a guardian of the entry to our port and our city's
shoreline."
According to Palmer, port security concerns are only a smokescreen.
He said that any small craft that want to get into the port
could.
"It is all about the peninsula," he said.
He and Baker both said the issue is not going to go away.
"Five of my collogues pointed to timing as their reason
for not supporting the study, because of national security
measure," Baker said. "I take that to say once national
security is in-check, we can pursue the idea again."
The Surfrider Foundation met Monday night to discuss their
next move.
"We affirmed our commitment to restoring shore in Long
Beach," Palmer said. "This vote or this lack of
vote, did not have any effect on plans to reconfigure the
breakwater. As we speak we are working on future plans."
|
|
Cara
Garcia/On-line Forty-Niner
The view of the breakwater that ultimately affects
the Long Beach coastline.
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
Search our site
DEPARTMENT
OF
JOURNALISM
ONLINE 49ER
DEPARTMENTS
ADVERTISING
ADMINISTRATION
DAILY
49ER ALUMNI
SUBSCRIPTION
SERVICE
GIVE
FEEDBACK
|
