Conflict arises over harbor breakwater in San Mateo County

Len Materman, chief executive officer of OneShoreline, and Harbor District General Manager Jim Pruett both agreed that breakwaters or wall-like structures built by the U.S. Army Corps about 60 years ago are major contributors to the erosion. But the two agency heads disagree on whether it’s necessary to remove the barriers to reverse their effects to protect Pillar Point.

For years, the Harbor District has invested time and resources into a dredging project that would take 100,000 cubic yards of clean sand from the harbor’s east basin and place it on Surfers Beach “to restore habitat and provide a buffer against coastal erosion,” according to the district’s project page.

More than seven years into looking into the dredging issue and more than $1 million spent, the district is steps away from beginning its project, which was cited as the preferred method for combating erosion in a study conducted by the Army Corps and partly sponsored by the Harbor District.

If successful, Pruett said the district would expand the pilot project into an annual program, restoring shoreline resiliency while preserving the breakwaters, which were initially built to create a harbor of refuge for a fishing fleet and have since created an area along the coast booming with recreational visitors.

“The whole issue is how do we move sand from north of the harbor to south of the harbor, from Mavericks [Beach] to Surfers. The wall breakwater interrupts that and everybody knows that,” Pruett said. “[The dredging project] solves the problem of moving the sand from north to south, which is their whole concern — protecting Princeton-by-the-Sea. … That way, we keep the breakwaters where they are at and we keep the harbor a safe refuge.”

Materman said he strongly supports the Harbor District’s dredging project as a short-term initiative but argued for developing a more long-term solution that would allow “nature to take its course.”

OneShoreline is in the early stages of developing its plan for addressing erosion and unwanted sand accumulation on the coastside. A plan has not yet been fully fleshed out but, Materman said, OneShoreline worked with the same consultant the Harbor District contracts with to develop high-level ideas for modifying parts of the inner breakwaters to naturally redirect sand to areas in need of it including Princeton shoreline and Surfers Beach.

“Everyone agrees that the breakwaters are the problem. The question is, how do we make it not the problem in a way that doesn’t threaten the harbor? That’s the objective, and I think everybody agrees that’s the problem,” Materman said.

An outer breakwater currently under Army Corps control would go untouched and any modifications to the inner breakwater would likely require Harbor District support given that the wall falls under the special district’s jurisdiction.

That approval could be a difficult one to earn. Harbor Commissioner Virginia Chang Kiraly shared concerns that modifying the breakwaters could make the area incompatible with current uses including recreational activities and floating residential communities.

And Pruett shared doubt both projects could exist at the same time given that modifications to the breakwaters would open the harbor to the open sea and potentially reconfigure where that opening sits.

Without more details, Pruett said it’s hard to weigh in on the matter. He was most recently briefed on the matter by Materman at the start of the month but said he never heard back from OneShoreline officials after expressing some concerns.

OneShoreline then released an agenda on Friday with the issue included as a discussion item. Pruett said he was not alerted that the issue would be discussed and shared concerns that OneShoreline board members would not have a full understanding of how the Harbor District feels about the plans given that its board members were never briefed.

The item was eventually pulled from the OneShoreline agenda by Vice Chair Debbie Ruddock, also the Half Moon Bay mayor, who said she wanted to leave more time for Harbor District members to be looped in, prompting the Harbor District to cancel a special meeting it noticed.

“It was the right thing to do,” Ruddock said, noting the move was done out of professional respect for the Harbor District. “If communication was an issue, we’ll work harder on that next time but I think pulling the item was the right idea and we’ll work together on a schedule and on getting them sufficient information.”

Materman also noted the OneShoreline initiative will need much more time to develop, asserting it’s not too late for Pruett and the Harbor District board to provide feedback.

Pruett also reiterated that the Harbor District board feels no contention with OneShoreline members and only wishes to be brought into the discussion. Now that its special meeting was canceled, Pruett said the board will likely discuss the matter during its next meeting.

Both he and Materman said the bodies and other coastside agencies invested in protecting the shore have the same mission, to harden the area against sea level rise and to protect the residents and visitors who cherish the coastside.

sierra@smdailyjournal.com

(650) 344-5200 ext. 106