Santa Clara County Civil Grand Jury finds local response is inadequate
The Santa Clara County Civil Grand Jury has a
message for city and county officials who are dragging their feet regarding
sea-level rise: Get with the program.
Mired in complacency toward what they see as
a slow-moving emergency, public agencies are not adequately preparing for
future flooding from climate change, the grand jury found after investigating a
complaint questioning countywide planning and preparedness related to rising
seas.
Grand jurors made three determinations in
their report, titled, "A Slow Rising Emergency -- Sea Level Rise":
current flood-control measures won't prevent flooding from higher water levels;
cities abutting the bay, along with the county, are inconsistent in their
responses to the problem; and not every government entity that should be
addressing sea-level rise is doing so.
"Consequently, we have a disjointed
approach within the county to address the ramifications," they wrote in a
26-page report released June 16.
The grand jury cited several studies and
reports that identified sea-level rise as an emergency in California. Average
sea level in California is projected to increase by an additional six inches by
2030, 12 inches by 2050 and 36 inches by 2100, according to a 2012 report by
the National Research Council.
The cost of not addressing the sea-level rise
would be devastating, the grand jury noted. Santa Clara County ranks second in
the state in potential losses due to flooding and third in the number of people
who would be exposed to flood dangers, according to an April 2013 report,
"California's Flood Future," by the California State Department of
Water Resources and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
Sea-level changes could affect 270,000 people
-- and more than 257 technology companies -- and destroy $62 billion in
shoreline development, according to the Silicon Valley Leadership Group and
sea-level experts.
Mountain View has done the most to address
the problem; Milpitas has done nothing, the grand jury found.
Palo Alto has done some work -- mainly
through its plans for San Francisquito Creek. But it is ignorant of other
cities' efforts, and it has focused on sustainability and greenhouse-gas
reduction, but not sea-level rise, in its Climate Action Plan, the report
noted.
The city also released a 2014 "Threat
and Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment" report, but sea-level rise
is not one of the hazards in the report. Flooding and severe winter storms are
listed hazards, however, the grand jury noted.
Mountain View has a 12-project plan in place.
Its Public Works Department produced a feasibility report and capital-improvement
program for the Shoreline Regional Park community, which addressed sea-level
threats to the entire city.
Mountain View is also looking at possible
improvements to Charleston Slough and the Palo Alto flood-basin levees as well
as to the Charleston Slough tide gates. Costs for the suite of projects is
estimated at $43 million to $57 million, about half of which the city expects
to directly fund, according to Lisa Au, City of Mountain View principal civil
engineer.
The grand jury concluded that much of the
inertia is attributable to a lack of state and county direction. State Assembly
Bill 32, the 2008 California Global Warming Solution Act, directs county
governments to develop action plans to reduce greenhouse gasses to 1990 levels
by 2020, but there is no comparable legislation to address sea-level rise.
There is also no joint-power authority or any
other agreement between the Santa Clara Valley Water District and the cities.
The grand jury found a number of deficiencies in Santa Clara Valley Water
District, which by law is responsible for flood control in the county. The
water district has held only one public meeting since July 2012 on sea-level
rise, the jurors noted.
The grand jury recommended the water district
take a more proactive role to unify, integrate and direct the cities' and
county's efforts on sea-level rise. Palo Alto and the other cities should
prioritize the issue at a higher level. And Palo Alto should identify sea-level
rise as a hazard in its Threat and Hazard assessment plan, the report noted.
The looming problem was the focus of a June
19 conference spearheaded by U.S. Rep. Anna Eshoo, state Assemblyman Rich
Gordon and NASA Ames in Mountain View, which drew 250 people.
Len Materman, executive director of the San
Francisquito Creek Joint Powers Authority, said his agency has developed the
SAFER Bay Project. It is the largest multi-county sea-level rise project in the
state. SAFER Bay will design and conduct environmental reviews of levees and of
new flood-mitigation facilities for Palo Alto, Menlo Park and East Palo Alto.
Its goal is to protect the cities from a 100-year bay tide with 3 feet of
sea-level rise.
The San Francisquito Creek Joint Powers
Authority is also spearheading the $37-million San Francisquito Creek flood-control
project. Earlier this month Caltrans began construction on part of the creek
project, addressing bridging across U.S. Highway 101.
Experts said at the conference that gauges in
San Francisco Bay dating to 1857 revealed the sea level has risen about 7
inches in the past 100 years.
Palo Alto City Councilman Greg Scharff said
the conference has convinced him that the city needs to take another look at
its shoreline plans when it looks to update its pending Sustainability and
Climate Action Plan.
"There seems to be so much more we can
do in light of what was said today," he said.
The National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration (NOAA) has pointed to three main reasons for ocean-level rise:
oceanic thermal expansion, which occurs when water constrained by land masses
heats and moves upward onto low-lying areas; melting glaciers and polar ice
caps; and ice loss from Greenland and Antarctica.
June
26, 2015
Palo
Alto Online
By
Sue Dremann
No comments:
Post a Comment