Rising Tides, Tough Choices: Pacifica Allowed to Bolster Seawalls as a Stopgap Plan

Pacifica can continue using old seawalls and reinforce or expand them to protect the city from crashing waves, erosion and sea level rise over the next two decades, the California Coastal Commission ruled Thursday.

The controversial ruling serves as a stopgap so the city can develop a long-term strategy to deal with sea level rise, which was mandated by a state law passed in 2023.

The city is known for its sweeping beach, homes with views of the Pacific Ocean, big waves for surfing, a shoreline Taco Bell and hiking trails. However, many of the reasons people love and live in Pacifica are at risk from the effects of climate change, primarily rising seas and flooding from intensifying storms.

Pacifica’s push to improve and continue to use its old seawalls, backed by local elected officials and developers, was part of updating its more than 40-year-old local coastal program land use plan.

“That plan is no longer sufficient to address the challenging conditions we face in Pacifica: significant bluff erosion impacts from intensifying weather events, flooding from storm surges, rising sea levels and other effects of climate change,” Mayor Sue Beckmeyer said.

Under the new plan approved by the commission, Pacifica can continue to armor its shoreline at Beach Boulevard near Pacifica Pier and Rockaway Beach. Existing seawalls and riprap can be rebuilt or expanded.

Environmental groups, residents and other elected officials who opposed the seawall plan said it would make it more difficult to protect the coastline.

Both Gov. Gavin Newsom and the Trump administration are closely watching the decisions of the Coastal Commission, which the president has called for dismantling as federal lawmakers aim to weaken its purview.

Justin Cummings, chair of the commission, commended Pacifica for being one of the first cities to begin to adapt to sea level rise as part of the state’s mandate, in the face of a long history of erosion and the need to prepare for more in the future.

“The fact that there is tension shows this has been made very public,” Cummings said. “Our coastline is not the same, and there is no one-size-fits-all approach to dealing with sea level rise.”

The ruling attempts to balance developers’ needs with coastal protection, but opponents argue the plan to upgrade seawalls violates the Coastal Act, is short-sighted and will make it more complicated in the long run to adapt to sea level rise.

“When large-scale seawalls are built or rebuilt or reinforced, and the new development goes in behind it, long-term solutions like relocating out of harm’s way will fall by the wayside and seawalls will remain,” said Mandy Sackett, California policy manager for the Surfrider Foundation. “But in truth, it’s giving away our leverage now with no guarantee of results later.”

Opponents also argue that seawalls cause beaches to erode and can exacerbate flooding or the loss of coastal homes, roads and infrastructure in the long run. They said continuing to armor Pacifica’s coastline will ultimately lock the city into using seawalls as long-term strategies and sacrifice more of the city to the rising ocean.

Catalina Gomes, founder of the Muchia Te’ Indigenous Land Trust and descendant of a Ramaytush Ohlone settlement village in Pacifica, opposes the plan and said the commission declined her tribal consultation, although it agreed to work with tribes on any new projects.

“This is a culturally sensitive area for us. This is sacred land,” she said. “It’s a very short-sighted approach, and science proves that restoration of wetlands, marshes and dunes is the best solution to dealing with sea level rise.”

Surfers worry that more seawalls will eventually limit beach access, and some residents said that coastal hazards like erosion have already caused the city to tear down homes over the decades to prevent them from collapsing into the ocean.

Cindy Abbott, who has lived in Pacifica for decades, said intense storms and strong waves have resulted in “the end of her street being closed off every year and multiple times.” She asked the commission to denounce the plan and instead “honor the coast.”

However, Kate Huckelbridge, executive director of the Coastal Commission, emphasized that the 20-year seawall plan is a temporary solution for the “existential threat” from the long-term effects of sea level rise brought about by human-caused climate change.

“The scope and scale of that challenge here in Pacifica, but also for the rest of our coastal communities, is daunting,” she said. “Our beaches will disappear if we do not change how we live, work and play on our coastline. If we want to avoid that future, we need to get serious about planning for the future that we do want.”