ReportWire

Tag: california coast

  • Looking to vacation on the California coast? Marin County just made it harder

    Looking to vacation on the California coast? Marin County just made it harder

    [ad_1]

    A stay in Brian Maggi’s house, per the Airbnb listing, is what coastal California dreams are made of.

    “Bathed in natural sunlight,” it reads, you can “enjoy unobstructed panoramic views of the ocean and Point Reyes.” You can bring your dog. Walk to the sand. Savor “the perfect getaway” in the 1928 “BoHo surf shack.”

    The little house in Dillon Beach, a remote town in western Marin County, is a second home for Maggi, a software designer who lives full time in Livermore, a hundred miles southeast.

    He and his wife stay here a few weekends a month: Enough time to befriend neighbors and know the gossip, like who put in a new hot tub and who moved here to please a girlfriend despite hating the foggy weather.

    “We’re not full-time residents,” Maggi said, “but we’re not absentee owners.”

    “We’re really fortunate, and I get it,” Brian Maggi says of owning a second home in Dillon Beach. But he says cracking down on short-term rentals hasn’t made houses more affordable.

    When Maggi is not using the house, he rents it on Airbnb for about $300 a night.

    That’s a pretty common practice in Dillon Beach where, according to county estimates, a whopping 84% of the town’s 408 housing units are second homes and 31% are used as licensed short-term rentals.

    Are those vacation rentals ruining California’s rugged little beach towns? Or are they opening up the coast to people who can’t afford to live there? Depends who you ask.

    In Marin County, on the northern end of the San Francisco Bay, short-term rentals have become a lightning rod amid an affordable housing shortage in one of the most expensive — and beautiful — places in California.

    This month, the Marin County Board of Supervisors approved a hard cap on the number of short-term rentals it will allow in unincorporated places, including the bucolic towns hugging iconic Highway 1 and the Point Reyes National Seashore.

    The ordinance imposes a cap of 1,281 short-term rentals for unincorporated Marin County, where there were 923 licensed as of January.

    The county has placed specific limits for 18 coastal communities, most of which will be allowed no more than the existing number of short-term rentals — while some will have to reduce their numbers. The exception is Dillon Beach, a historic vacation town where the short-term rental market will be allowed to significantly grow.

    A man in a wetsuit carries a surfboard down a narrow street.

    Dillon Beach homeowner Paul Martinez walks home after surfing. “Rent it responsibly,” Martinez says about owners renting out their houses when they are not in town.

    Colorful surfboards are mounted on a turquoise home.

    Mounted surfboards add to the charm of this colorful home in Dillon Beach.

    In Point Reyes Station, population 383, there are 32 short-term rentals, according to the county. Under the new rules, 26 will be allowed. In Stinson Beach, the cap will allow the amount of rentals that currently exist: 192.

    In Dillon Beach, vacation rentals will be allowed to grow 63%, from 125 to 204. The town has no school and the only businesses are a resort and its general store, which supervisors noted make for a different kind of community than many of the other towns dotting the Marin coastline.

    County officials said they expect the number of existing short-term rentals to shrink through attrition. Current license holders will have to reapply and adhere to stricter regulations, which can include expensive septic upgrades. The new rules allow just one short-term rental property per operator, and licenses will not transfer to new owners if a property sells.

    Debate over the issue has raised questions not just about limited housing in Marin, but also about whether Airbnbs have become a critical means of providing public beach access — a right enshrined in the California Coastal Act — in seaside towns with few hotel rooms.

    “Please do not codify this anti-visitor, exclusionary behavior. Do not turn a region dense in coastal public recreational lands into an exclusionary playground that only the elite can access,” Inverness resident Rachel Dinno Taylor, founder of the West Marin Access Coalition, a citizens group that fought the measure, said in a speech last month before the California Coastal Commission.

    The Coastal Commission regulates development in the Coastal Zone — which is generally the first 1,000 yards from the shoreline but extends a few miles inland in some areas — and increasingly is weighing in on local efforts to limit short-term rentals.

    A small boat rests on grass in front of a home.

    If it weren’t for vacationers — who fill the village with laughter and kids and wagons and dogs — Dillon Beach would be dead most days, residents say.

    Since 1992, the Coastal Commission has considered at least 47 short-term rental ordinances. It has approved all but four, including Marin County’s new ordinance.

    “Vacation rentals can provide important public access to the coast, especially where hotels are scarce. But without thoughtful guidelines, they can also have unintended impacts on local housing availability,” Kate Huckelbridge, executive director of the Coastal Commission, said in a statement to The Times. “We think Marin County achieved the right balance for their unique and world-famous coastline.”

    The West Marin Access Coalition, many of whose members rent out their homes and so have a financial stake in the debate, argued the county did not have enough data to prove short-term rentals directly affect housing availability. Many residents rely upon income generated by their rentals to afford staying in their homes, Sean Callagy, a member of the coalition, said in an email.

    The county’s new policy, he wrote, will “create hardships for low- and middle-income residents, worsen housing insecurity and deny visitors access to the coast.”

    An aerial view of a pristine beach.

    An aerial view of Stinson Beach in Marin County.

    For years, high-demand destinations across California — including Los Angeles city and county, Palm Springs, Malibu, Ojai and San Francisco — have tried to rein in rental platforms such as Airbnb and Vrbo, citing the need to prevent housing from being converted into de facto hotel rooms .

    In Marin County, the explosive growth in short-term rentals has been particularly divisive in smaller towns. There, the number of full-time residents is dwindling while millionaires’ second — and third — homes, many of which are used as seasonal rentals, sit empty much of the year.

    That’s a cruel paradox when there are not enough affordable homes for people who work in those communities, proponents of the cap say.

    In unincorporated Marin County, the median sales price of a single-family home rose 98% from 2013 to 2021, to $1.91 million, according to a countywide housing plan adopted last year.

    “Housing affordability and housing supply were really the driving factor in why we’re addressing short-term rentals right now,” said Sarah Jones, director of the Marin County Community Development Agency. “There’s not housing being built. And the housing that’s available, people are just seeing that it’s more profitable and easier to use it as a short-term rental than to rent it out long term.”

    Although Marin County has much open space, it has little room to expand housing. Roughly 85% of its land, including the Point Reyes National Seashore and the Golden Gate National Recreation Area, is public space or agricultural land protected from development.

    Marin County Supervisor Dennis Rodoni, who represents the scenic West Marin towns where vacation rentals are most heavily concentrated, said they have transformed “tiny communities where even losing a few homes is a big deal.”

    “Our volunteer fire departments are losing volunteers,” he said. “Our schoolteachers, we’re having a hard time locating them in the community; they have to commute long distances.”

    Visitors stroll through a quaint town.

    Visitors stroll through downtown Stinson Beach along Highway 1 in West Marin County.

    The elementary school in Stinson Beach, he noted, is “having a hard time keeping its doors open” because so few children now live there. The town’s population, according to census data, plunged 38% from 2016 to 2022, to 371. In 2022, there were no children younger than 15.

    According to county estimates, 27% of housing units in Stinson Beach are used as short-term rentals — many of which are in the gated neighborhood of Seadrift, a flood-prone sand spit.

    The town has “become like Martha’s Vineyard on the West Coast,” said August Temer, co-owner of Breakers Cafe on Highway 1 in Stinson Beach. “It’s not people’s primary residence.”

    A bearded man in a down vest stands behind a bar.

    August Temer, center, co-owner of Breakers Cafe in Stinson Beach, says as a business owner he likes Airbnbs and the tourists they bring. But it’s sad, he says, that his employees can’t afford to live in town.

    Standing behind the outdoor bar on a windy afternoon last month, Temer, a 45-year-old who grew up in Stinson Beach, said that as a business owner he likes Airbnbs and the money-spending tourists they bring in. But it’s sad, he said, that none of his employees can afford to live in town and must commute — which makes it difficult to keep workers.

    Mac Bonn, the general manager, said he drives 45 minutes “over the hill,” traversing a winding mountain road, to his home in Fairfax.

    A man and woman in their 70s sit in an eclectic home filled with art and books.

    “We used to know this as very much a vibrant neighborhood,” says Bruce Bowser, seated with his wife, Marlie de Swart. “A lot if it’s thinned out. A lot of people are older and have passed or moved on.”

    In nearby Bolinas, artist Marlie de Swart and husband Bruce Bowser welcomed the new rules, telling the Coastal Commission in a letter that their town “is being changed from a characteristic village to a vacation rental suburb.”

    The county ordinance limits the number of short-term rentals in Bolinas to 54. There are now 63.

    The septuagenarian couple bought their century-old house with picture windows and redwood ceilings in downtown Bolinas in 1992 for about $230,000. They were stunned when a nearby house recently sold for nearly $3 million after its owner died.

    Bolinas is so famously opposed to outsiders that, for years, a vigilante band called the Bolinas Border Patrol cut down road signs on Highway 1 that pointed the way into town.

    Alas, Google Maps directed tourists to Bolinas. And the Airbnbs kept them there.

    "Home towns need homes," states a sign that greets visitors in Bolinas.

    Bolinas residents say neighbors have been replaced by short-term guests and empty second homes, making the town feel more like a vacation rental suburb than a cozy hometown.

    (Genaro Molina / Los Angeles Times)

    During the summers, De Swart said, the town is overrun by visitors whose cars idle on narrow streets for more than an hour as they wait to park. Neighbors have been replaced by short-term guests and empty second homes.

    “We used to know this as very much a vibrant neighborhood,” Bowser said. “A lot if it’s thinned out. A lot of people are older and have passed or moved on. We used to look out on this valley, and there were a lot of lights at night. Now, it’s mostly dark.”

    Sitting on the couple’s living room table was a copy of the Point Reyes Light newspaper. On Page 11 was a classified ad that read: “In Search of Affordable Home,” placed by their friend, Tess Elliott, the newspaper’s publisher.

    “We are the publishers of the Point Reyes Light and the assistant fire chief at the Inverness Fire Department,” the ad reads. “Please help us become permanent residents and continue to contribute to the place we love.”

    Elliott, 44, said she and her husband have been running such ads for years. The mother of two young children, Elliott and her family live in an Inverness house that has been “rented to us at well below market rate” for the last decade by “a generous family.”

    “It’s very fragile,” she said of life as a renter in Inverness, a town of 1,500 on the Tomales Bay with 93 registered short-term rentals. “People with kids, like us, can only take that so long. You want some stability. You want to invest in a property.”

    Lately, she said, “we aren’t feeling very hopeful.”

    Frank Leahy, a software engineer, bought his house a mile northwest of the newspaper office in 2020 and got a short-term rental license just before the county, in 2022, enacted a two-year moratorium on new operating licenses.

    Leahy and his wife live full time in Inverness. But they travel a few weeks a year and list their house, with a bocce court out front, on Airbnb for $300 to $500 a night. Leahy said the county clamped down too broadly on short-term rental owners, conflating those who rent their homes full time and others who, like him, only rent a few weeks a year.

    “I can name people who live up and down the street. If those were just rentals? It would be kind of weird,” he said. “I don’t have a problem with people wanting to rent out their home for a short amount of time.”

    Leahy said short-term rentals are being scapegoated for the housing shortage in a place where it is prohibitively difficult to build.

    About four years before they bought their home, he and his wife purchased an empty hillside lot nearby, planning to build a house. It took years to get all of the permits and to have the required bird, bat, geological and traffic surveys done. During that time, the cost to build rose by several hundred thousand dollars, he said. They gave up and sold the land.

    On a chilly Wednesday morning last month, Dillon Beach was virtually silent — save for the plop-plop of sandals worn by a lone wetsuit-clad surfer walking home, and the tinkling of raindrops on Maggi’s windows.

    With its gloomy weather, bad cell service and lack of jobs, Dillon Beach, on the south end of Bodega Bay, isn’t for everyone, Maggi said.

    “A lot of the bugs in this place are its feature,” said Maggi, 54. “There’s no town. There’s no main drag. … This place has always been made of vacation homes. It’s not conducive to full-time living. It’s really far from everything.”

    If it weren’t for vacationers — who fill the village with laughter and kids and wagons and dogs — the place would be dead most days, he said.

    Maggi and his wife bought the house in 2020, when they and their adult children were going stir-crazy amid the pandemic. It was a financial stretch, but renting it out has helped. A gregarious Illinois native, Maggi joked that he had become a “California cliche” — a middle-aged guy with a beach house, a cool van, a border collie mix and a surfboard, even though he can’t surf well.

    “We’re really fortunate, and I get it,” he said. But he finds it “kind of shameless” for the county to use the affordable housing crisis to justify cracking down on short-term rentals. The two-year ban on new licenses, he said, did not suddenly make houses cheap.

    “You had this moratorium!” he said with a laugh. “How’s your affordable housing going?”

    [ad_2]

    Hailey Branson-Potts

    Source link

  • Fire marks Oceanside Pier’s latest chapter in a troubled history

    Fire marks Oceanside Pier’s latest chapter in a troubled history

    [ad_1]

    Firefighters have contained a fire that engulfed the end of the Oceanside Pier, a local landmark that has been destroyed by fire and storms and rebuilt several times in its 136-year history.

    On Friday, the wood pylons of the 1,954-foot wooden structure were still smoldering from the blaze that ignited Thursday, officials said. No injuries were reported.

    Oceanside and Strand beaches are still closed to the public as an environmental group cleans up the debris that has washed ashore. The fire also damaged a vacant restaurant that used to be Ruby’s Diner and a snack shop that housed the Brine Box, a seafood eatery.

    “90% of the pier was saved thanks to a really quick response,” Oceanside city Public Information Officer Terry Gorman Brown said. “A lot of times when piers catch, they’re made of wood — they’re toast.”

    The structure sits so high above the water that the sea spray couldn’t dampen the flames, she said.

    “We don’t know [the cause] yet because until [the fire] is fully out we can’t really get out there,” said Brown.

    The city engineer is assessing the damage and evaluating when the pier might reopen to the public.

    This isn’t the first time the pier has caught fire. The last time was in 1976, when a blaze destroyed parts of the pier’s fish market, according to Kristi Hawthorne, director of the Oceanside Historical Society, who wrote a brief history of the pier for the Oceanside Chamber of Commerce.

    The wooden pier is the longest of its kind on the West Coast and has been rebuilt five times since it was first constructed in 1888, so many times that it may not be considered the same pier.

    “It’s never the same pier,” said Hawthorne. “But in our hearts and in our minds, it’s still always the Oceanside Pier.”

    The pier was originally built as a commercial shipping wharf to bring business to Oceanside, which was incorporated the year the pier opened. But two years later the wharf was destroyed in a large storm and was rebuilt four years later as a sightseeing pier with iron pilings.

    The pier has been torn down or damaged in storms multiple times. Today’s sixth iteration of the pier was built in 1987 at a cost of $5 million.

    The worn nubs of the first wharf can still be seen at times in low tide, and other parts of the structure have managed to survive the test of time. The access bridge connecting pedestrians to the pier is almost 100 years old, and the city is using funding from a sales tax measure to help demolish and construct a new bridge that will be approximately three stories high and house restaurants and other businesses.

    Oceanside is still in the preliminary design phase of that plan, with the new building estimated to cost around $40 million.

    Despite the pier’s battered history, Hawthorne said, the city’s residents have always been determined to rebuild because it is a part of the local identity.

    “It is the pride of Oceanside,” said Hawthorne, who started researching the pier in 1987 as a volunteer with the Oceanside Historical Society.

    The pier has been a part of landmark moments in Oceanside history. In 1916, a huge flood washed through San Diego County. Roadways and railroads were cut off from the area, Hawthorne said, and the pier was used to deliver emergency supplies by boat.

    During World War II, the pier became a military lookout for enemy planes and submarines.

    Hawthorne’s children have grown up visiting the pier and eating there on special occasions. She said local residents have their graduation photos taken overlooking the water. It’s one of the first places she recommends tourists visit.

    “You take one of the most beautiful, iconic walks,” she said of the view from the pier.

    The current pier may need to be rebuilt again by 2037, as it has an estimated 50-year lifespan.

    Its ever-changing nature adds to its charm, Hawthorne said.

    “We’re not taking [the fire] as a loss,” she said. “It’s just a new chapter.”

    [ad_2]

    Jireh Deng

    Source link

  • Opinion: A San Francisco carve out could wreck California’s landmark coastal protections

    Opinion: A San Francisco carve out could wreck California’s landmark coastal protections

    [ad_1]

    If the coast of California is a state asset worth trillions of dollars — and it is — why is the state agency that has successfully protected that asset for 50 years under assault? The answer — “unnecessary permitting delays” — is unfounded. Yet California’s exceptional history of coastal protection is in greater jeopardy today in the halls of our state Capitol than it has been for generations.

    Like water flowing downhill, California’s incomparable coast has always been a magnet for development. In 1972, with this in mind, the voters of California overwhelmingly approved Proposition 20, a ballot initiative that set in motion the 1976 California Coastal Act. Unlike South Florida, the Jersey Shore or other coastal regions devoured by privatization, the California coast was by law given special protection: The coastal zone would be developed not as an enclave for the wealthy but for everyone’s use, with provisions for protecting its natural resources and its breathtaking beauty.

    The California Coastal Commission was created to enforce the act with a specific charge to balance the needs of the ecosystem with the need for public access and economic development, including affordable housing. It works like this: Local jurisdictions come up with coastal plans that the commission must approve. Once a plan is in place, development permits are handled by the city, town or county, although those decisions can be appealed to and by the commission.

    Over the years, the Coastal Commission has successfully defended public access to the beach in Malibu, Half Moon Bay, Carlsbad and other towns. It has helped preserve state parks, open space along the coast and the beach itself — denying permits for oil drilling, more than one luxury resort, an LNG port (in Oxnard) and a toll road (at San Onofre Beach). In 2019, it fined a developer nearly $15.6 million for replacing, without a permit, two low-cost hotels along Ocean Avenue in Santa Monica with a boutique hotel.

    Predictably, this process has often been in the bull’s-eye of Coastal Act critics, and while the rationale may vary with the moment, their goal remains the same: To weaken oversight by the commission and return land-use control entirely to local governments.

    Today, low affordable housing supply along the coast is the basis for attack. In legislation introduced in January, with a purpose of “resolving unnecessary permitting delays in the disproportionately low-housing Coastal Zone,” state Sen. Scott Wiener (D-San Francisco) has proposed an unprecedented carve out of 23.5% of the coastal zone in San Francisco. Specifically, Senate Bill 951 would delete from commission oversight residential areas on the city’s western edge, as well as a piece of Golden Gate Park. As the first significant coastal zone reduction in more than 40 years, this attack on the commission could set a dangerous precedent that would invite similar carve outs from San Diego to Santa Monica to Crescent City.

    Last month, San Francisco’s Board of Supervisors voted overwhelmingly to oppose SB 951, and, one day later, the Coastal Commission, by unanimous vote, did the same.

    The existential threat that this legislation poses to the Coastal Act and the entire California coast is undeniable. Among numerous commission responsibilities affected, SB 951 ignores the agency’s essential role in planning for sea-level rise adaptation along San Francisco’s increasingly vulnerable coast. And it seems no mere coincidence that the excluded area includes land proposed for a controversial 50-story condominium and commercial project in the flats of the Outer Sunset neighborhood north of the San Francisco Zoo.

    The claim that the Coastal Commission is responsible for housing inequity in the coastal zone, though long on rhetoric, is belied by the historical record. Indeed, when the Coastal Act became law in 1976, it required that “housing for persons of low and moderate income shall be protected, encouraged, and, where feasible, provided.” The commission actively complied, approving or protecting from demolition more than 7,100 affordable units between 1977 and 1981 and collecting an estimated $2 million in “in lieu” fees to support affordable housing.

    But in 1981, the state Legislature amended the Coastal Act to remove the commission’s affordable housing authority. Contrary to the claim of “unnecessary permitting delays” on which SB 951 is based — only two coastal development permits in San Francisco have been appealed to the commission in 38 years — it is this amendment, and the fact that developers prefer to build high-end projects, that has produced today’s affordable housing deficit in the coastal zone. As then-Coastal Commission Chair Leonard Grote warned in 1981, “The passage of this bill would make sure that the ability to live near the coast is reserved for the wealthy.” And so it has.

    If increasing the supply of affordable housing near California’s coast is actually the goal of SB 951, then restoring, not reducing, the commission’s authority is needed. It was a mistake in 1981 to remove the commission’s power to require that projects it approved included affordable housing, and it’s a mistake in 2024 to expect that diminishing the coastal zone will right that wrong.

    The California Coastal Commission has an extraordinary record of success in protecting California’s most valuable environmental and economic resource, and its regulatory role is as essential today as it has ever been. SB 951 would weaken, not promote, equal access to that resource, and it threatens to erode, perhaps irrevocably, the most successful coastal management program in the country.

    Joel Reynolds is western director and senior attorney for the Natural Resources Defense Council in Santa Monica. Tom Soto is a former alternate member of the California Coastal Commission and a Natural Resources Defense Council board member.

    [ad_2]

    Joel Reynolds and Tom Soto

    Source link

  • Treacherous surf pounds California amid flood advisories and coastal evacuations

    Treacherous surf pounds California amid flood advisories and coastal evacuations

    [ad_1]

    California’s first huge swells of the winter are wreaking havoc on the state’s coastline as an incoming atmospheric river storm is forcing evacuations amid flooding of beach and coastal roads.

    Marin County residents in the Calles Pinos, Pradero, Sierra, Onda Resaca, Ribera and Embarcadero areas as well as Calle de Arroyo were ordered to temporarily evacuate Thursday morning due to high risk of wave damage and coastal flooding. Evacuated residents were told to head to the Stinson Beach Community Center.

    Santa Cruz County issued an evacuation warning Thursday on X, formerly known as Twitter, for coastal areas near Seacliff State Beach because of flooding.

    Within the evacuation area, the tourist hot spot known as the Rio del Mar Esplanade is currently flooded with several inches of storm water. On X, the California Highway Patrol cautions that residents avoid the area and not attempt to drive across or through.

    According to the National Weather Service’s coastal flood warning for the Bay Area, large breaking waves are causing significant flooding of beach and coastal roads. The waves are depositing large amounts of debris and causing road closures.

    A surfer rides a wave at Surfer’s Point on Thursday in Ventura.

    (Brian van der Brug/Los Angeles Times)

    The San Francisco Bay Area coast could see waves up to 40 feet in some locations. The National Weather Service issued a warning for residents to stay away from rocks, jetties, piers and other waterside infrastructure.

    In Southern California, the waves aren’t expected to be as big, but high surf is expected through Saturday, meteorologists said. In Ventura County, waves of up to 12 feet have already been reported, and the Central Coast has seen 18- to 20-foot swells, said Mike Wofford with the National Weather Service’s Oxnard office.

    In a beachside community in Ventura, residents watched as waves washed trash bins away, sending foaming streams of seawater into neighborhood streets.

    A high surf advisory went into effect at 4 a.m. Thursday for Point Conception in Santa Barbara County and Hermosa Beach, Manhattan Beach and Palos Verdes Peninsula beaches in Los Angeles County, all of which can expect sets of 15- to 20-foot waves and dangerous rip currents.

    “We’re expecting the highest waves today to be arriving either late morning or early afternoon and then, maybe some drops in height tomorrow, but still well above normal,” Wofford said.

    The waves will pick back up Saturday when another surge of higher swells arrives.

    There have been really strong storms over the Pacific Ocean that “we don’t necessarily see because they move up to the north or go in some other direction,” Wofford said.

    While the storms are moving through, strong winds can form big waves, which “propagate out along, and the waves just come barreling right in,” he said.

    A Harbor Patrol lifeguard jumps a wave near Ventura Pier on Thursday.

    A Harbor Patrol lifeguard jumps a wave near Ventura Pier on Thursday.

    (Brian van der Brug/Los Angeles Times)

    Along with the high surf advisory, the National Weather Service issued a coastal flood advisory through 10 p.m. Saturday.

    Although no structural or road damage is expected, there is an increased risk for drowning, the agency warned. Rip currents can pull swimmers and surfers out to sea, and large breaking waves can cause injuries, wash people off beaches or rocks and capsize small boats.

    “Never turn your back to the ocean,” the National Weather Service said on X.

    Rain won’t be compounding the waves in the Los Angeles County area, as the forecast doesn’t call for rain until early Saturday and will continue for most of the day until it tapers off, Wofford said.

    There’s a 30% to 40% chance of rain Sunday into Monday, but it will be in the form of light showers.

    [ad_2]

    Karen Garcia

    Source link

  • Man and child swept into ocean at Half Moon Bay amid ‘sneaker wave’ warnings

    Man and child swept into ocean at Half Moon Bay amid ‘sneaker wave’ warnings

    [ad_1]

    A 54-year-old man was swept into the ocean with a young girl on Saturday afternoon at Half Moon Bay, spurring a search by air and boat crews.

    The 5-year-old girl was recovered at Martin’s Beach by San Mateo County Fire personnel and taken to a nearby hospital, but U.S. Coast Guard crews were still searching for the man as of Sunday morning. The Coast Guard said in a statement that it did not have information about the condition of the rescued girl.

    The National Weather Service warned this weekend that a broad stretch of the California coast from Point Reyes to Big Sur is at risk of “sneaker waves” that can sweep across beaches without warning, pulling people into the sea and moving logs and other heavy objects that can crush people. It urged everyone to stay out of the ocean and warned that people could be yanked into the water from jetties, rocks and beaches.

    The U.S. Coast Guard launched its search on Saturday after receiving a report about the incident at 1:20 p.m., dispatching a 47-foot motor lifeboat and a helicopter to the area, according to the agency. An 87-foot patrol boat was also sent to Half Moon Bay on Saturday night.

    [ad_2]

    Emily Alpert Reyes

    Source link