A community-advocacy organization hopes to delay building a new aquatics center on a 5.8-acre site in Belmont Shores. This rendering of the proposed building is taken from a May 2016 presentation on the plans.” captionposition=”left” revealfx=”off”] A community-advocacy group who have long argued against building a new pool complex in Long Beach’s 3rd District are now taking their fight to court. Last week, the Citizens About Responsible Planning (known as CARP) announced that the group has filed a lawsuit at the LA County Superior Court. The group is challenging Long Beach’s certification of the environmental-impact report that would be needed to build a new aquatics center on a 5.8-acre site in Belmont Shore. The City plans to build the center to take the place of the former Olympic-pool complex that had been closed in 2013 and later demolished in 2015 due to earthquake-safety issues.
Ann Cantrell, a member of CARP’s board of directors, is a 5th-district resident and longtime community advocate. She voiced concerns with the pool center’s design and location.
“The only thing left for us at this point is to take this to court,” Cantrell said. “Otherwise, the City will go ahead and build this [!] we can’t rely on the fact that the Coastal Commission might stop it.”
Cantrell acknowledged that the California Coastal Commission could ultimately deny the City’s application to build the new aquatics center.
“So, we are not against building an aquatics center— a municipal swimming pool,” Cantrell said. “We think this location is the biggest problem. We’re also saying in our lawsuit that there was not enough study of the alternate locations, and that there is a better location for this.”
The pool complex is a major investment by the City. According to a presentation to the city council by Assistant City Manager Tom Modica last month, the City back in 2014 had approved a $103.1-million budget for the project. He acknowledged that the final design of the aquatics center is subject to approval by both the California Coastal Commission and the City, and a more accurate estimated total will be determined when that final design has been completed. The City’s Tidelands Funds, which are dependent on the price of oil, had been expected to fully fund the project with $99 million raised within a year.
That was when the price of oil was about $99 a barrel back in 2014. Modica acknowledged in his May 16 presentation that since the price of oil had gone down at some point to $29 per barrel, the City staff will be exploring the possibility of generating the money through private fundraising. During his presentation, Modica said the City now has set aside $61.5 million for the project.
Cantrell explained that her group has considered new global-warming research, which suggests that the sea levels will significantly increase and could cause serious damage to the complex. She said that a new study from the State of California previously estimated that the oceans will probably flood the building in 40 years.
“Sure, it’s not going to happen tomorrow,” Cantrell said, “but at some point, this building is going to be useless because it’s going to be flooded with water [!] But a lot of people are saying, ‘Well, when that happens, all of Belmont Shore will be gone.’ Well, that’s true, but why put a $100-million building there when you can find a safer place to put it?”
Her concerns over the rising levels of the sea are echoed in a letter from a staff member working for the California Coastal Commission, the other major agency besides the city council responsible for deciding the fate of the pool complex. It is the commission, not its staff, which will make that decision. Seventh District Councilmember Roberto Uranga serves on the commission. In May, he and Councilmember Lena Gonzalez voted against the majority of the council, which opted to move forward with the project with the understanding that the commission will provide more input on the aquatic center.
Steve Hudson, who serves as the district director for the California Coastal Commission, wrote a letter on May 11 to the City outlining major concerns, including the issues about the sea-level rise.
“Commission staff believes,” Hudson wrote, “that the primary issue raised by this project is that, based on the information contained in the City’s DEIR, although the beach is currently wide enough that the structure would likely be safe from wave action in the immediate future, given sea level rise, the new pool facility is expected to be subject to wave action and shoreline erosion over the structure’s expected life.”
Modica did address Hudson’s concerns that the new facility would be located in an area at risk to rising sea levels and soil erosion. He wrote a letter responding to the Coastal Commission’s district director.
Modica cited research known as the “Wave Uprush Study” that showed “the project structure to be sufficiently protected against sea level rise and a 100-year storm event except for the high-projection year 2100 sea-level rise scenario of 5.5 feet; the year 2100 is near the end of the structure design life.”
Modica argued that the design has taken into account the concerns over the rising levels of the oceans.
“Given the uncertainty of the amount of sea-level rise, these are worse-case projections that have been accommodated into the building’s design,” Modica explained in his letter to Hudson dated on May 16. “It is important to note that much of the urbanized Southern California shoreline will be vulnerable to coastal erosion and flooding well before the year 2100 high-projection sea-level rise scenario, and the Wave Uprush Study demonstrates that the project structure will be sufficiently protected, where other beach areas may not.”
Kevin Lee, who serves as the communications officer for Long Beach Development Services, confirmed that the report Modica cited had been prepared by consultants contracted by the City as part of the environmental study.
Even before the city council had voted in favor of certifying the environmental reports last month and had taken other related actions to approve what is currently being called the Belmont Beach and Aquatic Center, the proposed center has some strong advocates.
Debby McCormick is a coach with McCormick Divers and has deep personal ties to the former pool facility in Belmont Shore. Her late husband, Glenn McCormick, created the diving club when the Belmont Plaza Olympic Pool was built in 1968. Its membership roster includes Olympic and national champions.
When the council voted last May to take the next step in the plans to build the new aquatic center on the old site, McCormick was among those who sincerely supported the City’s new project.
“We could host, possibly, the Olympic diving trials, and if nothing else, at the very least, we could use it as a training site for the Olympics,” she told the council last month. “I think the design of the pool is unbelievable, and I love what they’ve done.”
McCormick praised the design of the pool and stressed the importance of having a place to teach not only diving, but also other aquatic sports and water safety.
“We need this pool, and it will be so positive,” she concluded. “It will make us the aquatic capital of America.”
Just wondering what the Surftider and/or the Army Corp of Engineers have to say about any potential impacts that the presence and location of this new $100 Million plus pool facility could have on the plans to modify the Long Beach Breakwater?
What is wrong with you people! There is a big ocean for swimming, what a waste of $$$$.These centers are for centers in the middle of the country that are NOT near any beautiful ocean.
Spend the $$$ on the homeless, better medical care for people as well as animals, and this list can go on and on.