Council Weighs 3 Options for the Lagoon

Tuesday night Redondo Beach City Council will consider three swim-free alternatives for Seaside Lagoon in its latest bid to cope with increasingly tighter water quality standards. Two call for drastically altered recreational offerings; the third choice would keep the salt-water attraction closed for at least this summer while the city pursues legislative remedies.

At this point, regular operations of Seaside Lagoon this summer seem unlikely.

The city has already spent hundreds of thousands to resolve issues related to the quality of the water discharged from the attraction back into the ocean. According to the city, it has spent $358,600 on this since 2005, with the majority of that going toward testing and monitoring. It paid a fine of $55,000 for exceeding limits of total suspended solids in 2002; another $51,000 fine from May 2003 to July 2008 is pending.

City officials have grown increasingly frustrated about the lagoon as the regional water control board has tightened standards on water the attraction releases back into the ocean. Last year, the city initially decided to keep the attraction rather than face fines that could exceed $20 billion, but relented after the L.A. Regional Water Quality Control Board temporarily eased its restrictions. The city has been going back and forth with water board officials ever since, with calls for the facility's with each setback and new condition imposed.

During the last City Council session, officials attempted to by refusing to OK expenditure for another study stipulated by the water board. 

It doesn’t help that the city already subsidizes 43 percent of the facility’s $650,113 annual operating budget. The attraction brings in $320,000 annually from daily admissions and $50,000 from party rentals. The majority of the attraction’s 80,000 to 10,000 annual patrons come from outside the city; approximately 15 percent are Redondo residents.

Here are the three options:

1. Fill the pool with sand and put beach volleyball and tennis courts in its place. The city estimates that it would cost $175,000 to fill it with dirt with existing sand to cover. Officials estimate it would cost $330,000 to fill it with sand.

The drawback? This alternative would likely drastically cut admissions.

“Without the swim feature admission may drop considerably, and it is unlikely that patrons will be willing to pay an entrance fee to the facility,” the city report by Acting Recreation and Community Services Director Maggie Healy states. “Revenue loss will be partially offset by reduced staffing needs and the elimination of chemical costs for water treatment. Inflatable jump-houses could be added to the venue to increase attractiveness for families with children.”

The city estimates that it would cost $350,000 to make those changes and add jump house. It estimates an annual operating budget of $304,209.

2. Fill in the salt-water lagoon and install a splash pad/water play feature, volleyball and beach tennis courts, and inflatable jump-houses. According to the city such water-play features—enabling kids to dash through recycled water—are popular at other attractions. Officials project that they could charge a nominal admission fee for the lagoon in this configuration, intended to be temporary. This option would require $750,000 expenditure. Annual operating budget is estimated to be $425,209.

3. Keep it closed this summer while legislative remedies are considered. This option would still cost the city $146,539 to keep it operational. 

City Council meeting is open to the public at 6 p.m.