Council approves Grand Canal restoration plan over wetlands objections

The City Council approved a mitigated negative declaration and moved forward with the Grand Canal restoration project (item 39), a proposal the city says will complete tidal flushing between the restored Biona Lagoon and the Venice Canals. The council vote to approve the item was 14-0.

Public speakers, including Marcia Hanscomb of Wetlands Action Network and representatives of the Sierra Club, urged the council to order a full environmental impact report (EIR) rather than accept a mitigated negative declaration. "This is part of the Bayona Wetlands," Hanscomb said, arguing the project would harm wildlife habitat, increase lighting and use public funds on landscaping that is "not an ecosystem." Other commenters, including local residents and nature-walk organizers, described mudbanks, crabs and important bird habitat in the project area and urged postponement.

Russ Ruffing, supervisor in the Bureau of Engineering's environmental group and the author of the mitigated negative declaration, told the council that CEQA requires the lead agency to balance public objectives and that expert regulators had reviewed the document. "All of those agencies that I just mentioned first approved the same exact design on a gigantic scale in the Venice Canals back in 1992," Ruffing said, noting that the Department of Fish and Game, the Coastal Commission, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, the State Regional Water Quality Control Board and the State Historic Preservation Officer had opportunities to comment and had not returned negative determinations during the public review period.

Councilmember Ruth Galanter said the council's action simply creates the opportunity for property owners to form an assessment district and does not itself levy assessments. City staff said approximately 80 percent of the affected parcel owners in the assessment district have expressed support; the staff report cited about $750,000 in proposed public funding for project elements such as sidewalks and water-quality improvements.

Opponents said the project uses a mitigated negative declaration to avoid full CEQA review and asked the council to wait for decisions from the Coastal Commission and other state agencies. Proponents said the scope mirrors earlier canal restorations and that completing the link is necessary for proper tidal flushing. The council voted to approve the negative declaration and proceed.

The council action allows the project to move forward to the permitting stage; several regulatory agencies will continue their formal permit reviews. The council's approval does not override those agencies' permitting authority; the city acknowledged some state-level appeals were possible.