In a recent government meeting, officials discussed the need for two variances related to a construction project aimed at addressing environmental concerns in Malibu. The first variance pertains to seismic safety, as the geotechnical report indicated that the factor of safety for seismic conditions could fall below the required minimum of 1.1, raising concerns about potential liquefaction failure. The second variance is linked to the shoreline and bluff development ordinance, which mandates that structures be elevated to mitigate hazards associated with anticipated sea level rise over the next century.

The project involves the construction of a bulkhead designed to protect an on-site wastewater treatment system (OWTS). During the meeting, staff recommended that the commission consider approving the project, adopting resolution 2471, or amending it as necessary based on the commission's discussions.

A key point of contention arose regarding the height of a retaining wall associated with the project. While the environmental review indicated the wall's height as 10 feet, a compliance table listed it at 9.25 feet. Questions were raised about whether a variance was needed for the wall, which exceeds the standard height limit of 6 feet. However, it was clarified that the code allows retaining walls up to 12 feet if they are integral to the structure, which in this case, is the OWTS system.

The project owner expressed frustration over the lengthy approval process, highlighting the financial burden of the ongoing requirements and the urgency of addressing the environmental impact of the current septic system, which is not functioning properly. The owner urged the commission to expedite the approval process to facilitate necessary repairs and upgrades.

As discussions continued, some commissioners expressed concerns about the retaining wall's height and whether it should require a variance. A proposal was made to grant a variance for the wall, emphasizing the need for clarity on the definition of structures in relation to the project.

The meeting concluded with a commitment to further evaluate the variances and the project's implications for environmental safety and compliance with local regulations.