A Third Option for Malibu Lagoon Restoration

Last Saturday, many well-educated people packed into to learn more about how to stop this summer’s project to bulldoze . A lawsuit has been filed by three environmental organizations against the state of California to stop implementation of the plan. After all the evening’s presentations had ended, about 80 to 100 people stayed in the room to ask questions and seek more detailed information.

Longstanding environmental groups such as Heal the Bay, Santa Monica Baykeeper and the newly formed state agency Santa Monica Bay Restoration Commission had planned the Lagoon project and steered it to completion.  The California Coastal Commission unanimously approved the relatively unpublicized plan last October. But recently, that plan has been creating misunderstandings in our community. The diverse group of more than 300 homeowners, small business owners, surfers, bird watchers, scientists, artists and creative people who turned out Saturday night wanted to hear the plan’s details.

I heard the phrase “gentler, kinder plan” used again and again on Saturday night. And so while advocates and opponents of the plan might seem at odds with each other, I believe both sides sincerely want what is best for the environment at Malibu Lagoon. And I’m hoping the situation won’t have to be settled in court, that all the money that would go to lawyers might be saved and used for better things here in the community.

I hope all the environmental stakeholders on each side will be able to resolve—or, at least, lessen—their differences. And it looks to me right now as though the scientists and biologists at least seem willing to explore possibilities.

Also, in a surprising twist, an overlooked Army Corps of Engineers hydrology report unveiled by Caltrans engineers during the Pacific Coast Highway bridge replacement project about 20 years ago might prove to be a pivotal link in producing a third alternative. This could result in a reconciliation among the environmental groups as well as a true restoration of the lagoon.

Could it be that returning the creek to a more natural, direct flow to the ocean may well be the best idea in the long run?

There is no denying that the current bulldozing plan is a harsh approach with an uncertain outcome. But as distasteful as bulldozing may be, some opponents of the current plan might not object to limited bulldozing upstream—and not in the lagoon itself—if it would mean bringing Malibu Creek back to its original course. 

On the other hand, State Parks officials and the agencies supporting this summer’s project may now be more receptive to the idea of altering their reconstruction plans.

It is clear that some aspects of this summer’s project have not been fully considered. The state’s plan has the potential to be an artery-clogging mess during Malibu’s busiest visitor period. There will be huge piles of smelly lagoon muck set out to dry. New species of insects will migrate if the muck is not dried before putting it onto trucks to be redeposited. The trucks will be hauling away 14,000 cubic yards of viscous gunk that will be drooling onto local roads and causing potentially unsafe conditions. When dried, it will become dusty silt on PCH. Who will receive Caltrans’ ongoing clean-up invoices?

The Army Corps of Engineers’ report pointed out that the lagoon does not drain naturally into the sea. The report cites an alteration to the course of Malibu Creek that occurred when was under construction in the 1970s.   

When Pepperdine was built, hillside grading was required. Trucks transferred the earth from Pepperdine to the east side of Malibu Creek near Serra Road, dumping it at a site across the creek from .

The extra earth created an obstruction in the creek bed and it caused a turn in the course of the water. Instead of flowing straight into the lagoon as it had done previously, the water began carving out more land along the western streambed boundary. It began to undermine the east bank of the shopping center near Guido’s.

During the El Niño of 1992-93, when heavy rains, flooding and erosion threatened Cross Creek merchants, Grant Adamson, who owns the land between the shopping center and the creek, stepped in to help. Acting under emergency state guidelines, he installed a revetment (or a rock barrier) to shore up the creek side.

But the Coastal Commission now is requiring removal of the rock barrier even though that will put the shopping center in jeopardy during the next heavy storms. Instead of waiting for that to happen, we could use this occasion to engineer a solution that not only will protect the shopping center from further erosion, but that will create more water circulation in the lagoon. 

More water circulation is a major goal of the State Parks engineering project.  And restoring the creek to its original direction should be acceptable to some opponents of the state project.  Doing this also will change the location of the lagoon breach, a situation which will please surfers who have been unhappy since the 1983 lagoon restoration that moved the breach and weakened the Malibu wave at Third Point.

If the creek alignment is not realigned and the rock barrier is removed one thing is clear.  We will be building a new revetment during the next El Niño.

It was the Corps of Engineers' hydrologists who had discovered that this creek course alteration had been affecting the lagoon and the breech. We still have the water flow calculations that they did for Malibu Creek in ’93. We know those calculations are correct because the footprint of the old bridge was reduced by 80 percent.  The new bridge is so environmentally sound that it has little effect on the lagoon, proving they were 100 percent right in their calculations.

Today, we are left with a frustrating situation. State Parks, Caltrans, the Corps of Engineers and the Coastal Commission have conducted research on Malibu Creek. But they have not shared or discussed their work with one another or with the people of Malibu. 

My proposal is to take some of that bulldozer money earmarked for the lower lagoon project, and use it to move the Pepperdine fill material to the west bank of Malibu Creek. Volunteers then could remove all the non-native and invasive plant materials. Moving the peninsula soil will straighten out the course of the creek entering the lagoon under the PCH bridge.

With a corrected and straighter flow, water will leave the lagoon, taking with it a majority of the proposed 14,000 cubic yards of objectionable silt material. With this plan, you could almost leave the dredging of the lagoon completely alone.

The quarter-acre sand island, which sits directly in the path of a corrected flow, will have to be pushed toward the Adamson House. This sand island was created only in the last decade, but the new breach that will occur naturally will be where the old breach occurred before the 1983 restoration.

A potential benefit may occur, restoring the famous, great Third Point wave.

—Jefferson "Zuma Jay" Wagner, Malibu City Council member