Letter to the Community: About Laguna Canyon Road

By Dave Kiff, Laguna Beach City Manager

Over the past several weeks, a number of Laguna Beach residents have emailed or met with me asking good questions about Laguna Canyon Road (LCR) and the possibility that the city may agree to Caltrans’ “relinquishment” of the road to the city. I’ve appreciated that good and thoughtful input very much.

State highway relinquishment is a state-sponsored and precise process whereby the California Transportation Commission “relinquishes” (not sells) a road to another level of government (a willing one). This happens primarily for a couple of reasons:

1. The road is not part of a state network of roads that is necessary for large-scale, regional transportation;
2. A local agency near the road may want to redesign the road in a manner that is contrary to Caltrans’ design standards but makes more sense for the community; and
3. The state sees the benefit (in terms of avoided maintenance and other costs) of not owning the road.

The road is not “sold” to the locality. It’s given to the locality, typically with an amount of funds that Caltrans would otherwise have to spend to bring a deficient road to a “state of good repair.”

Why would relinquishment of LCR even be of interest for Laguna Beach? 

It’s a good question – which I’ll answer below. A better one now may be: “Is the concept of relinquishment worth exploring further?” The answer (to me) Is “yes, it’s worth exploring.” But should we blindly take on relinquishment of the road? No – and we haven’t done so.  

Here’s what I think I know after five months back in town and my 22 years of living here previously:

Many Laguna Beach residents agree that Laguna Canyon Road, as configured today, is problematic for many reasons:

• The above-ground power lines and transformers can pose potential wildfire danger. While the last fire sparked by power lines on LCR was relatively small and happened on a calm day in July, it only takes one bad event on a warm, windy day to cause major damage. 
• Too many drivers hit the above-ground utility poles. 
• It could be much safer for cyclists and pedestrians by possibly including a Class 1 (separated) bike and pedestrian travel lane.
• It’s hard to cross safely – especially near the dog park, animal shelter, food pantry, or if you’re coming to or from a business in the Canyon or one of the regional park trailheads. 

Given that LCR is one of three ways we get into and out of Laguna Beach, making LCR a safe and reliable route could help us get folks in and out during the next and inevitable disaster.

Whether we like it or not, LCR is one of the main ways for 100,000s of people to get to the beach. It doesn’t make sense to expand it for cars, but it may make sense to make it more multi-modal (i.e., safe and efficient ways to take transit in or bike in). The cost of all of this – and the net benefit – needs further study before a decision is made.

On that front, a decision hasn’t been made. We have time for the study.  It’s exactly what we’re doing. These four steps make sense to me: 

1. Decide as a community what a safer road design might look like, including the removal of the overhead utilities;
2. Analyze that design’s cost;  
3. Understand where the funds for any road improvements and undergrounding might come from besides the city and its taxpayers. Have a good sense of our competitiveness for these funds.
4. Decide as a community whether to proceed further towards relinquishment. 

The city has embarked on the “Protect and Connect” project. Protect and Connect is a good way to learn more about the options, costs and benefits of the project. To date, hundreds of residents have participated by offering ideas. I joined the meetings, too, wearing a hat as a resident, cyclist (hat became a helmet), hiker and driver. So have many of you. 

What are the projected costs? Where would funds come from?

Here are generally the cost items (totaling about $140 million in 2023-24-ish dollars) and possible revenue sources to offset them. Please know that much more work needs to be done to refine these amounts and sources and that costs will change with inflation over time.

Possible Revenue Sources

What is envisioned regarding proposed improvements to LCR?

Undergrounding power and other above ground utility lines, adding U-turns and stoplights in the right places, and improving the road and its bicycle and pedestrian facilities (possibly via a separated bike lane). 

Can these improvements also be done if Caltrans owns the road?

Likely not – largely because Caltrans’ policies will not allow the undergrounding of utilities directly below a Caltrans-controlled road.  Caltrans has insisted that utilities go alongside (but not under) its roadway. However, this may not be feasible because of the adverse impacts on the adjacent open space.  Also, in some cases, the open space has restrictive covenants that do not allow encroachments. Lastly, Caltrans’ standards don’t allow a road design that incorporates many of the design features important to us in Laguna.

Will the capacity of LCR be expanded? 

Not for cars. There is nothing in the plans that would expand vehicle capacity along LCR. But, better bike and pedestrian facilities will improve safety and capacity for cyclists, walkers and runners.

What about long-term liability?

This is certainly an important consideration. During our Cost Analysis’ study period (2009-2018), there was an average of 84.7 crashes on LCR each year, with five fatalities over the ten years (0.5 fatalities on average per year). Each fatality has an average cost factor of $10,800,000, as assigned by Caltrans. (Note: This is an assigned number based on statewide averages and not actual costs for LCR fatalities.) The fatalities skew the average annual cost for all crash types to $11 million. 

If the poles are removed and the road is improved (including having better intersections at cross-streets like Canyon Acres, LCAD and the Laguna Coast Wilderness Park’s trailheads), we expect a safer road with reduced accidents involving pole strikes, and fewer fatalities. Further, building everything to modern road design specifications makes the road safer, and there can be improved design immunity. Will this improve safety and bring accident numbers down? That’s the hope and expectation.

It is also important to note that the city will have liability insurance to cover accidents on LCR, so the out-of-pocket cost to the city is expected to be mostly for insurance premiums and deductibles. Other communities around us, like Dana Point and Newport Beach, have accepted roadways relinquished by Caltrans. We will gather data from those cities regarding out-of-pocket costs as we further evaluate the issue of relinquishment.

Is the city alone on the hook for the estimated $140 million in costs? 

No. As noted in the table above, several sources of funds can offset costs:

• For road construction: Sources of funds to offset this expense include state and federal sources, Renewed Measure M revenue collected by Orange County and more. These sources can fund both new construction and offset maintenance costs. A strong “complete streets” design, including a Class 1 bikeway, would be very competitive statewide for new construction funding.
• For utility undergrounding: There are grant sources to offset some of these costs – including but not limited to SCE’s TUG Program and FEMA’s BRIC program (competitive and annually renewed).

I heard that the reduction in wildfire risk via LCR undergrounding isn’t significant.  Is that so?

The cost/benefit discussion comes from HDR’s Benefit Identification and Quantification work in October 2020. There are at least two parts to the printed work that should be read together to provide appropriate context:

On Pages 21-22 and 26 of this document, HDR says that, “Data provided by Caltrans documents seven recent incidents involving utility poles or above ground power lines that sparked small fires in the area of Laguna Canyon Road, and the undergrounding of power lines could have averted these fires. None of these incidents, however, resulted in loss of life or significant property damage.”

On Page 24 of this document, HDR says that “the unpredictable nature and high volatility of wildfire damage imply that the distribution of potential wildfire mitigation benefits has a very “long tail” in statistical terms. In other words, while the average expectation of wildfire mitigation benefits based on eleven years of historic damage may be very low, there is a possibility that wildfire mitigation benefits may be extremely high (my emphasis added) —measured in the hundreds of millions of dollars—under certain circumstances.

The key context for the above is that, for the 11 years studied by the Benefit Identification and Quantification, there wasn’t a major fire that caused significant damage. However, as the same document notes, wildfire mitigation benefits may be extremely high if we can avoid a rarer but still catastrophic event.

Importantly, FEMA’s National Risk Index shows that the Laguna Canyon open space area – and the area all around Laguna Beach – including LCR – is “relatively high” compared to other areas for earthquakes, wildfires and landslides. Read more about FEMA’s National Risk Index here. 

Is this a done deal? 

No.  While the city has executed a relinquishment intent letter with Caltrans, there are more steps ahead – and time and studies – before making a final decision. There are offramps should the city council, with the community, decide that this isn’t feasible.   

Is taking over LCR the right course for Laguna Beach? 

We don’t know. But we think it’s at least worth exploring fully because the upsides are significant:

• Improved safety and reduced wildfire risk.
• An improved roadway with undergrounded utilities and well-defined bike and pedestrian paths.
• A likely reduction in accidents and road closures (and even help people safely leave their cars at home and bike to town when they come to the beach).

The downsides are important, too. There are potential liability costs and uncertainty about how or if meaningful construction funding will materialize in real time. We are optimistic that several state, federal, local, and public utility funds are available to offset many of the costs, but they are not assured or awarded yet. 

Thanks for reading, and thanks to those who asked good questions.  Please stay up to speed on this issue with our Protect and Connect website, including notifications of upcoming community open houses on this issue.