Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Wastewater topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council reviews $124 million preliminary plan to extend sewer along PCH to Hyperion; council authorizes county coordination letter
Summary
City staff presented a preliminary plan to run sewer mains and lift stations along Pacific Coast Highway connecting beachfront parcels to Hyperion. Estimated preliminary cost: about $124 million with a roughly 65‑month timeline; council authorized a coordination letter to Los Angeles County while asking staff to return with per‑parcel financial analyses and wider outreach to beachfront stakeholders.
City staff presented a preliminary design and stakeholder update Aug. 11 on a proposed Pacific Coast Highway wastewater conveyance that would connect oceanfront parcels to the Hyperion Treatment Plant. The concept uses a mix of gravity main and force mains along PCH with multiple pump/lift stations and a tie‑in point near Coastline Drive; staff said Hyperion has available treatment capacity for the projected flows.
Staff provided preliminary cost and schedule assumptions: a planning‑level total of approximately $124 million and a construction timeline the team estimated at about 65 months. Staff also cited an illustrative per‑parcel figure frequently used early in discussion (about $269,000 per parcel) while cautioning that a formal engineer's assessment would be required to apportion assessments, and that per‑parcel costs will vary widely based on seawall, topography and interim septic needs. Regional Water Board staff told the city they would consider interim septic repair and replacement approaches if the city commits to pursuing a long‑term sewer solution.
Council and dozens of public speakers expressed mixed views. Many beachfront property owners and rebuild advocates urged the city to proceed because aggregated sewer would avoid costly individual seawalls and advanced septic systems and protect ocean water quality. Other residents raised concerns about equitable assessments, potential future development pressure and the fairness of spreading costs to nonbeach homeowners. Council members repeatedly asked staff to provide more granular cost comparisons (per‑parcel estimates, likely assessment methodologies, and the projected net savings or increased costs for property owners who might otherwise install advanced onsite systems or seawalls).
After debate, the council voted to authorize the mayor to send a coordination letter to Los Angeles County seeking technical, political and financial assistance while adding an explicit statement that the letter is exploratory and does not commit the City to a final project. The motion also requested that staff return with a financial breakdown by parcel categories (for example, parcels likely to require seawalls, parcels that can build AOWTS without seawalls, and other zones), an outreach plan to beachfront stakeholders and an assessment of interim septic options pending construction.
Next steps include completing the preliminary design report this fall, continuing agency coordination (City of LA/Hyperion, Regional Water Board, City of Santa Monica, Caltrans), pursuing grant and low‑interest financing options (including state revolving funds) and developing detailed assessment engineering that would be required for any later district vote or financing mechanism.
