Wednesday, March 19, 2008

Beach Cranes

34 comments:

  1. Fuckin seawalls suck for everyone in the country except that one guy who lives at the west coast edge.

    Let nature take it course.

    Lets have a natural coastline just like the east coast.

    Armored coastlines only help that one person preserve wealth, they kill nature and they hurt the beaches and public.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Hard to argue with the last post. Succinct and to the point.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Hey, we are back to boulders.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Let nature takes it's course, refuse medical treatment when you have a heart attack.

    ReplyDelete
  5. It's too late to just say, let nature take it's course - you fuckface!

    The time to argue that was back when the city was deciding whether or not to let developers build there.

    I don't like the seawalls either.

    ReplyDelete
  6. incoming F Bombs-everybody...DUCK!!

    ReplyDelete
  7. AS a beach bluff property owner, I have no problem with letting nature take it's course via erosion. However I believe that if I am going to have less sq footage of property then I deserve a reduction in my property taxes. Say 4% per year. After all, fair is fair, you want me to let my property erode into the sea and I want less taxes!!
    We both win.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Armored coastlines only help that one person preserve wealth, they kill nature and they hurt the beaches and public.

    Well said. Non-wealthy people lose everything all around us. Why is it that a heavily insured guy on a cliff should be guaranteed no loses?

    ReplyDelete
  9. As far as seawalls go I think Leucadia has the most attractive ones in California.

    ReplyDelete
  10. That’s like an attractive nerve gas bomb shell dressed like a baby doll. It may look cute, but it still has lasting damage.

    I agree with the property owners comments about reduced taxes. I think the public should pay for each square inch of private property lost from erosion. Development of dams along the rivers reduces the beach and increases erosion. The public benefits from a natural coastline. Let the public pay for the natural coastline. Private property owners should be compensated.

    I would support a county wide tax to promote a more natural coastline. Buying private property to return it to natural coastline and open space for all to enjoy. There are similar programs in Northern CA. Its time to have a program like that in Southern CA.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Seawalls are bad, not good.

    Don't dress up dog poo and try to sell it as tootsie rolls.

    The guy on the cliff could get a reduction in property tax if he could show the home is worth less than what he is being taxed on.

    Assessment Appeals Borad is a bitch, though. County doesn't want to give up any more of our incoming tax dollars than it absolutely has to.

    ReplyDelete
  12. If we let nature's bluff erosion take it's course, in 53,339,002 years there will be no America.

    ReplyDelete
  13. anon11:49-Of course I should get a reduction in my property taxes, with erosion I have less land, less land equals less value, it's only logical. I feel a 4% reduction per year is quite acceptable. That money saved will go to shore up my sea wall.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Anonymous 10:39 sounds like a SANDAG mole setting the stage for the Quality of Life tax.

    ReplyDelete
  15. If thats the clear objective, I will vote for it

    ReplyDelete
  16. The period from 1884-1891 was very wet and stormy in the Encinitas area. The area had been surveyed from 1880-1883 by the California Southern Railroad, which began rail service between San Bernardino and San Diego in 1883. The very severe storms in 1884 severed the line in many places and pushed the company into backruptcy. Encinitas was isolated and had to be supplied by ship.

    An 1883 subdivision map of Encinitas shows land west of the present coast line at Moonlight Beach, including a Fifth and Sixth Street. The 1889-1890 San Diego County Tax Assessor records show that land parcels in this area were greatly devalued or stricken from the tax rolls.

    The bluffs in Encinitas are inherently unstable and subject to heavy erosion in strong storms. History shows not to mess with Mother Nature. Any seawall will turn out to be temporary in the long run. It is a risk homeowners take to live on the bluff edge. By all means reduce the assessed valuation of the owner's property when there is a loss. I don't think the public should be asked to subsidize anyone who chooses to live in a risky area.

    Sand replenishment is also only a temporary fix. One big winter storm can wash away all the sand very quickly. Guys like Steve Aceti are snake oil salesmen. They cannot truly deliver a long term solution to this problem. Mother Nature will eventually win out.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Oh Yeah, now I remember. that was the year, I had my taxes lowered from $6 per year to $3 per year.

    Lets hope for another flood year.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Wooops...... Maybe next time I wont irrigate my bluff.....My Bad.

    Click on the photo and look at it blown up.....look at all those white string like things hanging out if the bluff top....

    those are called 1 inch pvc irrigation lines. Look at all the greenery that slipped down towards the beach.....that does not grow without serious irrigation.

    I bet you 100 to 1 that the cause of the failure was a leaking irrigation line. Wow what an expensive lesson. Live and learn I guess.

    I hope other bluff top owners learn from this mistake. Seawall or not, don't irrigate your slope, you are excelling the failures.

    Like sand in an hourglass, these are the days of our lives.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Good post, last anonymous.

    To get a reduction in taxes, the homeowner would have to show that he or she is being taxed on a higher value than today's market value, as determined by current "comps."

    If the homeowner bought in the 80's, say, then Prop 13 would keep the taxable value down to less than today's market value. Thus it might be hard to show that the property is worth less, even with erosion, than the amount presently used as a tax basis.

    Those who buy along the bluffs are informed of the unstable situation. They choose to take this risk. Some or most insurance companies won't insure these homes for bluff collapse, I've been told.

    ReplyDelete
  20. When I was looking for a home in Encinitas in 1973 I looked on Neptune and made the decision then not to buy on the bluff. It was obvious to the naked eye that these bluffs weren't stable and any house would eventually fall into the ocean. If someone gambled and is now losing the rest of us shouldn't have to bail them out. Just like people that gambled with their home mortgage they couldn't affords the rest of us shouldn't have to bail them out.

    I for one don't think that sea walls benefit the community. However, I think that if the city bought the bluff top property as it became available, tore down any structures and made it a park we would all benefit.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Fifth and Sixth Street never existed. Somebody mapped it to try to swindle someone. Kinda like buying swamp land in Florida.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Funny. Some fools were paying property taxes on those Fifth and Sixth parcels until they were stricken from the tax rolls.

    ReplyDelete
  23. I never heard of a 6th st. being on any old maps, but if there was that does sound like a scam. I have heard the claim there is no 5th St. in Encinitas but a realtor friend of mine lives on that street north of Moonlight Beach.

    ReplyDelete
  24. and it ain't swampland.

    ReplyDelete
  25. Oh yeah, and I think the first Swami's temple toppled over the cliffs in the early 40's because they had a moat that went around it that leaked. Parts of that used to be visible. Notice too in the garden that the baptismal pool is kept dry.

    ReplyDelete
  26. Let nature takes its course -- only when it doesn't impact your property. Lets imagine a huge sinkhole started in front of your house -- just a natural one due to the sinking of the water table -- and you had the money to contain it -- would you just abandon your home because this is a natural disaster? Would you ask your neighbor to abandon their home if it happened to them. We all don't live on the waters edge but those who do are entitled to maintain their property.

    ReplyDelete
  27. If my fixing my sinkhole damaged the precious beach I would say I would be a selfish ass to fix it.

    Anyone ruining the beach is a selfish ass.

    ReplyDelete
  28. Heres one for the many that don't respect the beach:

    If fixing my sinkhole poisoned the water supply, I would not do it.

    Selfish act get repaid with Karma.

    Non selfish acts. Good Karma Good Life. Selfish acts pay the price in other areas of your life.

    ReplyDelete
  29. What is your take on the Marbella condo complex in La Costa that suffered from a landslide?

    ReplyDelete
  30. the issue with the bluffs in Encinitas is not natural erosion by the ocean hitting the bluffs, it is bluffs collapsing from rainfall and irrigation. These bluffs can be stabilized without seawalls. How does stabilizing a bluff poison the water? Given the fact that several people have been killed while sitting on the beach, wouldn't it be a good idea to stabilize the bluffs?

    ReplyDelete
  31. Given that many people have died on the roads and railroad tracks, shouldn't we make the roads and railroads safe?

    ReplyDelete
  32. What a stupid argument.
    Given that people drown every year, should we fix the ocean.

    ReplyDelete
  33. All things to everyoneMarch 31, 2008 2:04 AM

    Good idea. If you elect me to city council, I will fix the ocean too.

    ReplyDelete

Thank you for posting on the Leucadia Blog.
Anonymous comments are allowed, after moderator review.
The moderator works at his leisure.