How important is canyon creek? It matters to artists’ work/live project

Laguna Canyon Creek’s degree of environmental value is likely to be a prime talking point when the California Coastal Commission discusses a 30-unit artist work/live project proposed for Laguna Canyon.

The public hearing is set for Jan. 8 in Santa Monica.

The creek carries greater environmental worth to the ecologist hired by the commission than to a biologist hired by the city of Laguna Beach, according to the commission staff’s report for the proposed facility, which applicant Louis Longi wants to build on two parcels along Laguna Canyon Road.

But how much greater its worth matters. If the Coastal Commission deems the creek significant enough to be added to the U.S. Geological Survey map and the state’s major watershed maps, Longi would be required to make more changes to his project.

At stake is how close to the creek would Longi be allowed to build two two-story structures — with 17,242 square feet of indoor living and working space.

Longi’s current plans adhere to the rule that the buildings must be 25 feet from the center of the creek. If the creek were on the official maps, the buildings would be required to be 25 feet from the bank of the creek.

The waterway is not on the major watershed map, according to Community Development Director Greg Pfost, but the Coastal Commission could nonetheless determine that the creek is environmentally sensitive enough to be protected by the farther distance.

Roger Butow, an environmental consultant, said that no matter the outcome of the discussion, the project should be measured 25 feet from the bank to guard against impinging on plants and wildlife near the creek.

Butow, along with residents Audrey Prosser, Jackie Gallagher and Devora Hertz, appealed the City Council’s 3-2 decision to approve Longi’s project last April. The appeal sent the matter to the Coastal Commission.

“The development setback is insufficient,” Butow, executive director of Clean Water Now, an organization that develops sustainable water supplies, wrote in his appeal. “Construction and post-construction maintenance will have significant intrusions into habitat and streambed.”

Longi declined to comment for this story.

The facility’s proximity to the creek is but one controversial aspect of the project.

While proponents laud the project as a way for local artists to work and live in Laguna, a city renowned for its artistic heritage, opponents say the facility would violate the Laguna Canyon Annexation Area Specific Plan, which mandates that development in the area remain rural and small-scale.

In addition, residents are concerned that the project, which is slated to reach 36 feet high — allowable under city zoning standards — could impose noise and air and light pollution on the neighborhood and block views of nearby hillsides.

The Coastal Commission’s ecologist, Jonna Engel, who visited the site in June, said Laguna Canyon Creek is an environmentally sensitive area that warrants the utmost protection because of its location near protected wilderness.

“Although the stretch of creek adjacent to the proposed project site has been constrained by development and has sections of concrete-lined bank, it continues to support native riparian habitat and provide important processes and functions,” Engel wrote in a letter to coastal staff. “Streams and creeks are a rare and threatened habitat throughout California, and are easily disturbed and degraded by human activities and development.

“Many species of birds, mammals, reptiles and amphibians travel along creek and stream corridors to forage, migrate, disperse and locate mates.”

However, the city’s biologist, Kevin Livergood, said the environmental worth isn’t as significant as Engel’s interpretation would indicate, even though he found several plant species such as willow trees, blackberry bushes and heliotrope.

“The riparian habitat observed on site is very closely associated with the creek yet exhibits characteristics of heavy disturbance due to surrounding urban and suburban influences; therefore the habitat value of this disturbed area is low,” Livergood said in a letter to the city.

John Hamil, vice president of the Laguna Canyon Property Owners Assn., has lived in Laguna Canyon since 1977 and agrees with Butow that the buildings should be set at least 25 feet from the bank of the creek.

“When you have lived there, you see the degree of erosion,” Hamil said. “There is little protection on the property and that is a real concern.”

The decided-upon setback in this case could affect future projects in the canyon, which includes a mix of houses and small businesses, according to the commission’s staff report:

“There is a high risk that the local government’s decision regarding the appropriate setback will create an adverse precedent for future actions along Laguna Canyon Creek and other streams,” it said.

Another hotly debated element is the effect the facility could have on views of nearby hillsides and whether its size is too big for the area.

Longi altered the design several times to include pitched roof lines and larger setbacks from Laguna Canyon Road after residents and planning commissioners raised concerns about the facility clashing with the surrounding neighborhood and hillsides.

Coastal staff appeared satisfied with the changes.

“The design of the proposed project is more rural in character than urban in that it provides large setbacks and open spaces between neighboring properties,” the staff report says.

“Although the city’s certified [local coastal program] contains broad language pertaining to the preservation of public views, the size, mass and scale of the proposed development complies with the applicable development standards, and the project as approved by the city will not adversely affect significant public views of the shoreline or hillsides.”

Hamil disagrees.

“We would hope that the Coastal Commission would utilize the reasonable-person theory in deciding whether or not this proposed 36-foot-high, 250-foot-long [structure] ... is small scale relative to a neighborhood of homes averaging approximately 1,500 square feet,” Hamil wrote in a letter to the Coastal Commission.

Laguna’s land-use rules require officials to evaluate the effect of proposed development on hillsides and ridgelines and require that building design, location and arrangement avoid intruding on hillside and skyline views.

Longi said he’s done that, adding that drivers on Laguna Canyon Road should be focused on the road.

“Everyone says I’m blocking view lines, but there is nothing in the [municipal] code that says I can’t block a ridgeline at 45 mph for one second,” Longi said in February. “There’s no walking path, no sidewalk or gathering point to sit and look [at the hillside].”

This project could set the tone for future development in the canyon, Butow said.

“It’s a dangerous precedent,” Butow said. “You can’t imagine just this project. There will be others. How many parcels could be 36 feet high?”

The full commission staff report is available at coastal.ca.gov. The Jan. 8 hearing begins at 9 a.m. at the Santa Monica Civic Center, 1855 Main St.

[For the record, 4:45 p.m. Jan. 2: An earlier version of this article incorrectly identified biologist Kevin Livergood as being hired by project applicant Louis Longi. The city hired Livergood to give an independent review of the creek habitat, Longi said.]