ENSTU 300: Critical Thinking and Communication in Environmental Studies
Adapting to Sea Level Rise in Monterey Bay
Paige Francis, Environmental Studies Program, California State University Monterey Bay
Redfin.com 18 La Playa St, MONTEREY, CA
Introduction
Monterey, California has a beautiful coastline capitalized for residential, tourism, and
recreational use; however, when developing the area, the government, residents, businesses, and
developers failed to realize that California’s coast is prone to coastal erosion. Due to the lack of
knowledge about climate change while developing Monterey, developers couldn’t adapt their
building plans to compensate for erosion’s effects. Now, with homeowners, building managers,
and city planners having to decide how to respond to coastal erosion, stakeholders must decide
how to protect the coastline and reach compromises.
The two methods of response to coastal erosion and sea level rise are armoring (building sea
walls) and managed retreat (moving houses, buildings, infrastructure, etc away from the
coastline). Armoring the coast is significantly cheaper and easier to implement than managed
retreat, but is only a temporary solution. Retreating is costly, complicated, and can have an
emotional impact on those who relocate, but is the most logical long-term solution. Managed
retreat plans should be utilized to preserve the coastline many call home; while this takes
persuasion, time, and money, it is the best way to avoid infrastructure being damaged or
collapsing due to coastal erosion. Coastal armoring is not an adequate solution to sea level rise
and coastal erosion.
Historical Context
California’s coastline is 1,100 miles long and 86% is currently eroding. Coastal erosion has been
happening for the past 18,000 years and coastal cliffs are retreating 10 to 30 centimeters per year
on average (Stamski, 2005). Another contributing factor to coastal erosion is climate change and
sea level rise. Prior lack of knowledge of Earth’s rising temperatures and sea levels has allowed
California to develop its coast without any immediate consequence. Today, with new technology
and science, it is evident that our climate is quickly getting worse; building up the coast wasn’t
an initial issue, but now retreat plans or armoring need to be enacted across California (Stamski,
2005). Erosion is happening at a quicker rate which is why fast action is required.
In response to coastal erosion, around 10% of California’s coastline is currently armored,
including some areas along the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary (MBNMS). Armoring
a coast is a feat of engineering and a process that involves a lot of money, time, and supervision.
Armoring isn’t a long-term solution to protect the coast, considering armoring can also be
eroded. The MBNMS states that California residents are paying more than $75 million annually
to armor the shoreline; this includes the initial construction cost and maintenance costs
(MBNMS, 2009). Furthermore, all seawalls within the MBNMS must be reviewed and
authorized by the Sanctuary; the California Coastal Commission administers permits for
seawalls, ripraps, or other coastal armoring projects. Since 1992, fifteen sites around Monterey
have been approved for armoring projects (MBNMS Coastal Armoring Plan). Solutions can be
difficult to develop but necessary to implement; ideas such as managed retreats prioritize the
safety of residents and consideration of city budgets.
Instead of armoring the coast, California should shift its focus to managed retreat, “the strategic
relocation of structures or abandonment of land to manage natural hazard risk (Beachapedia,
2022).” Managed retreat is not a new concept as it has been on the global agenda since at least
1992. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) believes that retreating isn’t a
strategy to protect the land from the water but instead to “provide for people and ecosystems to
shift landward in an optimal fashion.” (pg 42) Implementing retreats has become a focus for
many policymakers, communities, and scholars (Lester et al., 2022). Relocating oceanfront
structures is becoming more popular than other forms of coastal management, or at least
considered more frequently in the planning/response process. Unfortunately, retreating isn’t
accepted well by those who own property along the shoreline. Even when government entities
propose retreating, it has rarely been implemented; landowners have concerns that retreating
would negatively affect property values. However, retreating is the safest way to push back
against the inevitable events of erosion and sea level rise (Griggs and Patsch, 2019).
Regardless of the dangers that come with living on the coast, people want to live within the small
retreating boundary between the land and the water. Monterey has a large residential appeal.
People are drawn to living by the ocean and embracing the coastal lifestyle. The development of
the coastline isn’t a surprise, due to the scenery and recreational activities the coast provides.
Due to local research centers such as the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary (MBNMS),
Moss Landing Marine Labs, and Monterey Bay Aquarium Research Institute (MBARI), many
scientific opportunities are located here, appealing to scientists from all over the world.
Monterey is constantly bringing in more people, which demands an increase in infrastructure and
housing accommodations. Continuing to develop the coast would be a mistake in the current
climate; new coastal developments would have a short lifespan and would require retreat plans
shortly after construction is completed, or potentially during.
Lastly, an important part of Monterey's history has also had a major impact on coastal erosion
and overall sand loss. Sand mining by companies like CEMEX had machines operating in
Marina, specifically the Lapis Lustre mine. Sand mining put Monterey beaches at a disadvantage
for natural protection against erosion. Extractive industries fail to realize how their negative
externalities are their responsibility. The public, instead, has to take the burden of their actions
(Pohl and Johnston, 2012). Even though the last sand mine was decommissioned in 2020, the
100 years of sand extraction has caused long-lasting effects on the coast; Southern Monterey Bay
has struggled to be resilient against coastal erosion.
Scientific Background
The Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary (MBNMS) defines coastal erosion as “the gradual
wearing away of rock or soil along the coast, such as that found in coastal cliffs and dunes, by
physical breakdown and transportation of material, generally caused by water or wind” (2006).
Erosion is most common when heavy storms happen during high tides, which typically take
place during El Niño years. However, every winter heavy storms take place, causing an increase
in high tides; El Niño events are an extreme version of winter storms, happening every 5-7 years.
Within hours, large sections of bluffs and dunes can erode and sand is removed during these
events as well. Beaches can become significantly narrower due to storm-driven sand removal
(MBNMS, 2009).
Earth’s warming climate is leading to an increase in El Niño years, in turn, increasing coastal
erosion. Studies have shown that El Niño weather used to have a relationship with solar output
but because of human-caused warming, we are now influencing the weather (Zuckerman, et. al.,
2023). Another natural factor causing harm to the coast is sea level rise. With ice caps melting,
shores are getting smaller. If coastal erosion wasn’t a concern for coastal infrastructure, sea level
rise would ensure it is the main concern; if the ocean continues to rise, managed retreat could
also be a solution to this situation. Similar tactics for approaching retreat for coastal erosion can
simply be applied to retreating for sea level rise. Moving affected buildings inland reduces the
risk posed by sea level rise. If armoring is installed and doesn’t provide protection against sea
level rise, it won’t protect the coast, compared to completely moving buildings away from the
water to protect them.
Stakeholders
When determining stakeholders that have an impact/are impacted by coastal erosion/planning,
many major groups can be identified. While this paper focuses primarily on Monterey Bay,
defending the coastline applies to all of California, and in fact the world. Every mile of the
coastline faces erosion. Stakeholders in Monterey include residents living in the La Playa
Townhomes, Monterey County taxpayers, and the Monterey City government.
Below is a chart that explains multiple stakeholders related to coastal management. For the sake
of brevity, only three stakeholders will be discussed.
Stakeholder Group Description/relevance Impact Concerns
La Playa Townhomes Live near Del Monte Directly impacted A seawall will cost
Residents Beach and El Estero by erosion and sea money and ruin the
Lake; live very close to level rise residents’ view while
the water retreating would
cause them to give up
their homes
Monterey County Will have to pay for Financial ability to Increase in taxes
Taxpayers coastal armoring/retreat support or deny
plans these policies
Monterey City Government in Responsible for Adapting the city to
Government Monterey creating adaptation climate change in the
plans most effective way
Monterey Bay In charge of approving Has the power to Armoring is a
National Marine coastal armoring allow armoring to temporary solution
Sanctuary be built and could be a waste
of money
Beachfront Business owners with Provide an Would lose business
businesses storefronts on the beach economic value to due to city plans or
beach space sea level rise/coastal
erosion
California Coastal State agency that plans Provides funding to Influence on coastal
Commission and regulates the use of coastal cities to planning decisions
land and water in the implement Local
coastal zone (CCC) Coastal Programs
La Playa Townhome Residents
The La Playa townhomes (near El Estero Lake, a small, manmade lake, and Del Monte Beach, a
popular recreational area) are at severe risk of being impacted by coastal erosion and sea level
rise. According to Zillow, these homes were built in the 1960s, before any knowledge of these
natural occurrences (Zillow.com). The townhomes are very close to the water, with a small
amount of beach between the water and the fence lines of the properties. Residents living in
these townhomes may have to leave their homes if a seawall is installed or if a managed retreat is
enacted. According to Francie Mitchell, a resident of the La Playa Townhomes, “We actually
were aware of the ocean outside our door when we bought our place in 2006! Being scientists by
trade, we were very aware at this time of the potential impact of CO2 and global warming on our
beachfront property.” Mitchell doesn’t regret her decision, “We bought anyway with the
understanding that we would get many years of enjoyment from the place and many years of
great memories with family and friends before these risks were realized. That has been very true
and we are still happy with our decision of many years ago.”
Homeowners could sell their property to the city if either of these plans were put into action
(City of Monterey, 2021). However, this might not be emphasized to said homeowners yet.
Mitchell is “not aware of what the financial compensation for the city would be. I doubt that it
would be either fair market value or match the record high sales the units have been getting
recently.” (F Mitchell, personal communication, May 15, 2024)
Many residents living on the beach in downtown Monterey have been involved in getting sand
mines shut down. Operations by Cemex’s sand mine were taking the sand off of beaches in front
of the La Playa properties. With strong public opinion, mines were shut down as it was severely
harming Monterey’s beaches (X Waissbluth, personal communication April 29, 2024).
The La Playa residents have already had to fight the city to protect their land once, and might
have to go through the emotional loss of leaving their homes due to sea level rise - something
they can’t control. “Our attitude may be different than many of our neighbors, but we do
understand that the ‘ocean is coming to get us’ and we may lose our home to water or city
plans,” Mitchell says. “We really don't think about that too much, but rather focus on continuing
to enjoy what we have and share our wonderful place with our family and friends. We are
prepared to walk away, which is easier said than done, but also smart enough to be paying
attention to when it might be a good time to leave.”
Monterey County Taxpayers
If coastal armoring was selected as Monterey’s solution to erosion and sea level rise, Monterey
County residents would see an increase in their tax to pay for armoring. To protect existing
structures a seawall could be built, costing around $5.5 million ($7,414,759.09 in 2024,
according to Inflation Calculator) to install, according to Pohl and Johnston (2012). An
additional $54,858 ($74,147.69 in 2024, according to Inflation Calculator) would be charged per
year for maintenance as well (Pohl and Johnston, 2012). A significant amount of money would
have to come out of homeowners’ pockets. Specifically, if a sea wall were built downtown,
insurance costs would be expected to increase for property owners (City of Monterey, 2021).
With sea levels rising, if the seawall exemplified in Figure 1 is installed, more properties would
fall within the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s (FEMA) special hazard flood areas
(SHFAs), or areas where flood insurance is necessary. Additional costs caused by seawall
installation can be avoided if a managed retreat is used instead; the number of SHFA properties
would be smaller in a retreat scenario (City of Monterey, 2021).
Increasing insurance costs due to the seawall presents irony in this plan. If a seawall is built, it
should be a form of protection and not put surrounding properties in harm’s way. Why should
residents have to pay tax dollars towards the sea wall and then also have to pay for flood
insurance? Insurance costs should not increase, based on city planning. The ocean will always
win against a seawall; perhaps installing one will do more harm than good.
Due to sea level rise and erosion, homeowners will have to pay more to insure their homes
against natural disasters; adding on the (potential) tax cost could cause pushback. Other locations
in Monterey, including the Sanctuary Beach Resort (private) and the Marina Coast Water District
buildings (public) will require seawall protection (Pohl and Johnston, 2012). Regarding the
Sanctuary Resort, who would pay for this? It seems unfair for locals to pay for a hotel,
somewhere tourists typically reside. Similar rebuttals could be proposed by Monterey residents
who live more inland and aren’t affected by coastal climate disasters. Inland residents might
disagree that they should contribute their tax dollars to coastal residents when city adaptations
don’t change their everyday lives. These are some of the tensions that need to be addressed by all
parties (and handled by the government) involved to reach a compromise that promises safety
and sustainability.
City of Monterey
Monterey’s city government has the political power to make decisions regarding adaptation and
controlling where funds for these projects will come from.
The City of Monterey conducted a study about how to approach the inevitable flooding of the
coastline and included illustrations of two ways Del Monte Beach could adapt; in both scenarios,
residents with oceanfront properties would have to leave their homes (2021). If the planned
retreat plan is chosen to redesign downtown Monterey, even more homeowners will have to lose
their properties due to the flooding illustrated in Figure 2.
Figure 1: An illustration of the proposed seawall construction in downtown Monterey (City of
Monterey, 2021)
Figure 2: An illustration of the proposed construction of a reimagined downtown Monterey
(City of Monterey, 2021)
Adapting to climate threats is an expensive task. However, making early investments in climate
resilience saves money and lives. Both the state and federal governments have noted this is a
better plan than responding to disasters as they arise. Adaptation plans benefit communities
beyond property owners; adaptation results in significant nonfinancial savings regarding safety,
property loss prevention, and the disruption of day-to-day life. Another benefit of adapting early
that the government might be interested in is the economic savings. Disaster relief and public
health costs would be reduced and money budgeted for rebuilding could be freed up and applied
elsewhere (City of Monterey, 2021).
The City of Monterey is very active in planning for adaptation and considering public opinion. In
January 2021, Have Your Say Monterey was launched to provide residents, businesses, and
community members the platform to educate themselves and give input on important topics in
the city. “Community engagement is critical to effective decision-making. This platform is
intended to share factual information and gather helpful, effective feedback from the community
in a way that is respectful and beneficial to decision makers.” (Have Your Say Monterey, ?)
Currently, two campaigns regarding coastal issues are open: The Local Coastal Program (LCP)
and Sea Level Rise Adaptation.
The City of Monterey administered a survey during a public meeting to understand the public’s
opinion1 on the proposed risk reduction measures and potential adaptations to the coast. Most
respondents agreed that Monterey should choose to adapt to and live with rising sea levels
instead of facing the safety risks posed by living behind coastal armoring. Evidently, 58% of
respondents believe living behind flood protection would degrade their quality of life and would
prefer the city to explore relocation options for at-risk, existing development. 32% of
respondents believed it would not degrade their quality of life; 10% said it would degrade their
quality of life but realized it is worth it to maintain existing land uses (City of Monterey, 2021).
The community is leaning towards a managed retreat and a reimagined downtown. If a managed
retreat is not implemented, this decision would require living below sea level; 70% of
respondents said that the risks of living below sea level are too high because of large storms and
earthquakes. To accomplish a managed retreat the community chose three ways to do so:
1
The public meeting had 50 Zoom logins while survey responses consisted of 81 Monterey Bay residents and
stakeholders.
● To emphasize and increase bike and pedestrian routes
● To reroute major arterials inland where possible
● To search for funding for a new viaduct bridging the retreat area at the heart of the city
The City of Monterey is currently working to make adaptation plans, as seen in the figures
above. According to their “Adapting A Threatened Transportation Network To Sea Level Rise”
plan established in 2021, the city has outlined plans through 2025 on how to remodel downtown
Monterey to best combat sea level rise.
Figure 3 Timeline depicting the city’s future adaptation plans (City of Monterey, 2021) *Now =
2021
Policy
As a result of scientific research regarding sea level rise and adaptation plans being a recent
development, policies have yet to be established and are difficult to find. The current state of
policy making requires enough knowledge of coastal erosion and adaptation plans to make the
correct decisions. Hence, policies are just beginning to be put into place around the world and in
the U.S., following new research and subsequent education of policymakers. Policies need to be
updated or adapted to apply to the current state of sea level rise to best inform cities on how to
act.
Many policies, including the 2024 426e. Federal aid in the protection of shores are about beach
nourishment practices. 426e is a federal policy promoting shore protection and related research
that encourages the protection, restoration, and enhancement of sandy beaches. While beach
restoration is important to the beach’s aesthetic and could be seen as a solution, it is not. Beach
nourishment is a short-term solution because the sand will continue to be blown or washed away
by the wind and sea. It is unclear if a policy like this would benefit a city, let alone Monterey
because of its preferential restrictions: “In carrying out this policy, preference shall be given to
areas in which there has been a Federal investment of funds.” (426e) Monterey has not received
a pertinent federal investment of funds compared to places like New Orleans post-Hurricane
Katrina or Houston post-Hurricane Harvey.
Nonetheless, Monterey has its own beach nourishment program. The Monterey Bay
Opportunistic Beach Nourishment Program was proposed by the cities of Marina, Monterey,
Sand City, and Seaside in 2019. The program aims to facilitate sand placement to mitigate
ongoing and future coastal erosion and sea level rise effects. Cities would perform multiple
distinct sand placement activities as “opportunistic sources become available and are determined
compatible.” Three types of projects are typically proposed by the city, one of them being beach
nourishment. The other two are coastal armoring (sea walls) and managed retreats (CEQA, 2019)
which would be more effective in protecting the land and properties from sea level rise.
Monterey has applied a Local Coastal Program (LCP) to the city; LCPs are required under The
Coastal Act, allowing governments can carry out policies of the California Coastal Act on a local
level. “LCPs are land use planning documents that lay out a framework for development and
coastal resource protection within a city or county’s coastal zone area. They are prepared by the
local jurisdiction and submitted to the Coastal Commission for certification.” (California Coastal
Commission) In 2014, Monterey received a $250,000 grant from the California Coastal
Commission (CCC) and the Ocean Protection Council to update its LCP. As of March 2022, the
LCP is being drafted and there is no current (April 2024) information about the state of
Monterey’s LCP.
Another campaign held by the city on Have Your Say Monterey is the Sea Level Rise Adaptation
plan. This document outlines the different ways of adaptation that could be implemented. The
figures in this section of the paper are from this document; according to the plan outlined in
Figure 3, the city should be close to deciding what methods to implement. While this decision
process has already taken a few years, many years of labor and government decisions will affect
the speed of progress.
Unfortunately, as there is a lack of policy regarding adaptation plans, disaster relief plans are the
only current, substantial response to these issues. Policymakers need to realize areas that are
threatened in their communities and communicate with the public and scientists to create
policies. The sooner decisions are made, the lower the risk of erosion-caused incidents.
Conclusion
Sea level rise is rapidly increasing, putting pressure on the requirement for adaptation plans to be
put in place. It is important to introduce these plans efficiently and make decisions that are fair to
property owners on the coast. Initiating managed retreat would be the smartest and most effective
response to protecting infrastructure on the coast. Policymakers must work closely with
environmental planners to bring these plans to the table. Monterey Bay is making progress
towards redesigning the city, but this is only the beginning. Hopefully, other coastal cities in
California will follow suit and examine how to best protect their cities against sea level rise and
coastal erosion.
References
Beachapedia. (2022, January 7). Managed retreat. https://beachapedia.org/Managed_Retreat
CA. (n.d.). City of Monterey, CA.
https://monterey.org/city_hall/community_development/planning/planning_projects/local
_coastal_program.php
City of Monterey. (2021, January). ADAPTING A THREATENED TRANSPORTATION
NETWORK TO SEA LEVEL RISE.
https://ehq-production-us-california.s3.us-west-1.amazonaws.com/9cab992330532d599c
7f0199622e22f44fa28a8a/original/1611783212/MontereyAdaptationReport_Compressed.
pdf_34ee9b431bf501c151324c6042106b6e?X-Amz-Algorithm=AWS4-HMAC-SHA256
&X-Amz-Credential=AKIA4KKN
Climate Change: The IPCC Response Strategies. (1990). IPCC.
https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2018/02/ipcc_far_wg_III_full_report.pdf
Coastal Armoring Action Plan. n.d. Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary.
Coastal Armoring Action Plan Summary. 2006. NOAA.
Griggs, G., & Patsch, K. (2019). The Protection/Hardening of Ccalifornia's coast: Times are
changing. Journal of Coastal Research, 35(5), 1051-1061.
doi:https://doi.org/10.2112/JCOASTRES-D-19A-00007.1
Have Your Say Monterey! (2022, March 3). Have Your Say Monterey.
https://haveyoursaymonterey.org/have-your-say-monterey
LCP Information. (n.d.). California Coastal Commission.
https://www.coastal.ca.gov/lcp/lcp-info/
Lester, C., Griggs, G., & Anderson, R. (2022). Shoreline retreat in california: Taking a step back.
Journal of Coastal Research, doi:https://doi.org/10.2112/JCOASTRES-D-22A-00010.1
Local Coastal Program. (2022, March 14). Have Your Say Monterey.
https://haveyoursaymonterey.org/local-coastal-program
Monterey Bay Opportunistic Beach Nourishment Program. (2024). CEQA.
https://ceqanet.opr.ca.gov/2019029005
Pohl, A., & Johnston, L. (2012). Lapis Sand Dollars: An Economic Analysis of Non-Market
Impacts of Lapis Sand Mine in Southern Monterey Bay. Center for the Blue Economy.
Sea Level Rise Adaptation. (2021, January 22). Have Your Say Monterey.
https://haveyoursaymonterey.org/sea-level-rise-adaptation-plan
Stamski, R. (2005). The impacts of coastal protection structures in California’s Monterey Bay
National Marine Sanctuary. aquadocs.org. NOAA
https://sanctuaries.noaa.gov/science/conservation/coast_study.html
Zillow.com: 34 La Playa Ave, Monterey, CA 93940 | Zillow
Zuckerman, J. C., Struzik, E., & Hurdle, J. (2023, October 23). Climate change now a major
factor in formation of El Niño. Yale E360.
https://e360.yale.edu/digest/el-nino-climate-change#:~:text=Recent%20research%20sho
ws%20that%20warming,more%20permanent%20El%20Ni%C3%B1o%20pattern.%E2%
80%9D
33 USC 426e: Federal aid in protection of shores. (2024). U.S. Code.
https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title33-section426e&nu
m=0&edition=prelim#426e_2
