US Army Corps of Engineers BUILDING STRONG ® And Taking Care Of People! Josephine Axt, Ph.D. Chief, Planning Division Los Angeles District July 10, 2013 Encinitas and Solana Beach, San Diego County, California Coastal Storm Damage Reduction CD

BUILDING STRONG ® And Taking Care Of People! 2 City of Encinitas, CA (Sponsor)  Teresa Arballo Barth, Mayor  Lisa Shaffer, Deputy Mayor  City Councilmembers  Kristin Gaspar  Tony Kranz  Mark Muir  Gus Vina City Manager City of Solana Beach, CA (Sponsor)  Mike Nichols, Mayor  Thomas Campbell, Deputy Mayor  City Councilmembers  Lesa Heebner  David Zito  Peter Zahn  David Ott City Manager State Parks, Division of Boating & Waterways  Steve Watanabe, Boating Facilities Division Chief  Kim Sterrett, Project Manager Key Study Partners

BUILDING STRONG ® And Taking Care Of People! Encinitas Segment 1 7,800 ft Solana Beach Segment 2 7,200 ft 3 State Map and Project Locations

BUILDING STRONG ® And Taking Care Of People! Protection of public infrastructure is needed. 4 Potential Structural Damage and Safety Hazards

BUILDING STRONG ® And Taking Care Of People! Solana Beach Encinitas 5 Bluff Failures – Public Hazards

BUILDING STRONG ® And Taking Care Of People! 6 Planning Objectives Reduce coastal storm damages to property and infrastructure along the study area shoreline and the bluff top, prior to the need for emergency action. Improve public safety in the study area by reducing the threat of life-threatening bluff failures caused by wave action against the bluff toe. Reduce coastal erosion and shoreline narrowing to improve recreational opportunities for shoreline users within the study area.

BUILDING STRONG ® And Taking Care Of People! 7 Environmental Considerations The primary environmental considerations identified during the scoping process were:  Potential impacts to nearshore rocky reef and surf grass habitats  Air quality impacts from construction equipment  Water quality impacts from beach nourishment  Noise impacts to nearby residences  Potential effects on recreation (including surfing)  Cultural resources  Public safety  Aesthetics

BUILDING STRONG ® And Taking Care Of People! Recommended Plan Features 8  100-ft wide berm  7,800 ft alongshore  Renourishment Cycle = 5 yrs (9 events)  Initial Volume = 680,000 cy  Renourishment Volume = 280,000 cy  Benefit to Cost = 1.5  200-ft wide berm  7,200 ft alongshore  Renourishment Cycle = 13 yrs (3 events)  Initial Volume = 960,000 cy  Renourishment Volume = 420,000 cy  Benefit to Cost = 1.9 Daphne Street G Street Tide Park Southern Boundary of Solana Beach Encinitas (EN-1A)Solana Beach (SB-1A)

BUILDING STRONG ® And Taking Care Of People! 9 Project Benefits  Coastal Storm Damage Reduction Benefits  SANDAG RBSPI and II projects were smaller in volume as they were designed to provided public recreational benefits only. These volumes were not sufficient to meet this study’s planning objectives.  Improve Public Safety  Recreation

BUILDING STRONG ® And Taking Care Of People!  Evaluate surfing quality along five key measures.  Most surf spots expected to be unchanged (17 of 21)  Surf Spots - Cherry Hill was identified and Rockpile will be added in final report.  Likely temporary changes to surfing conditions  Study does not attempt to put a value on how the surfing experience would be impacted  Surfing Economics - changes in surfing recreation value for proposed alternatives not quantified 10 Surfing Analysis

BUILDING STRONG ® And Taking Care Of People! 11  Monitor turbidity levels at borrow and placement sites.  Determine if beach fill areas are suitable for grunion spawning at start of spawning season. If suitable, monitor during predicted spawning events and avoid placement of sand onto areas with spawning.  Develop safety plan for public access at receiver sites  Pre- and post-construction monitoring of near shore habitats (rocky reef and surfgrass).  Surfing Monitoring Plan.  Physical and Habitat Monitoring at Borrow Sites.  Shoreline monitoring between the two project segments. Monitoring Commitments

BUILDING STRONG ® And Taking Care Of People!  Impacts determined using 2-yr post-construction surveys.  Restore or create like habitat at a functional equivalent value of 2:1 for rocky reef habitat.  Implemented in the project area at sites to be determined by the USACE, and the Cities in consultation with the various resource and regulatory agencies.  Reef would be constructed in a fashion similar to the Southern California Edison Wheeler North Reef. 12 Mitigation

BUILDING STRONG ® And Taking Care Of People! 13 Staff Conditions 1, 3-10, 12, 13  Staff Recommendations  Revised as per Addendum W12a dated 8 July  USACE position  Concur on all revised changes to these conditions.

BUILDING STRONG ® And Taking Care Of People! 14 Staff Condition 2 – Phased Review for Renourishment Projects  Staff Recommendation  Prior to each renourishment project, the Corps will submit to the Commission a consistency determination (pursuant to 15 CFR § (d)).  USACE position  Phase review is not appropriate since USACE is not proposing to make decisions in phases for this project.  USACE has continued responsibility to be consistent to the maximum extent practicable and work cooperatively with the Commission.  In the event there are significant changes from the current project, USACE would develop a supplemental consistency determination.

BUILDING STRONG ® And Taking Care Of People! 15 Staff Condition 11– Borrow Site Monitoring  Staff Recommendation  Prior to the start of project construction, the Corps will submit a borrow site monitoring plan to the Commission’s Executive Director for review. The plan will include measures to document the actual areas dredged during each nourishment project…  USACE position  Revised to limit borrow site monitoring to the “initial” nourishment.  Initial monitoring will provide information on impacts and recovery rates that would be the similar to renourishment events.

BUILDING STRONG ® And Taking Care Of People! QUESTIONS? 16