A years-long back-and-forth over unpermitted repairs to a Montecito grouted sandstone creek wall saw a resolution on Tuesday when the Santa Barbara County Board of Supervisors voted to reject two community members’ appeals of a Montecito Planning Commission decision to legalize the repairs.

The wall — 110-foot-long and ranging from 2 to 12 feet tall and 7.5 to 15 feet wide — was originally built along San Ysidro Creek sometime before 1945, a representative for the applicant said. 

A portion on the west bank, located on a private residential property, was partially damaged in the 2018 Montecito debris flows. It was repaired at that time without the proper permit.

While media mogul and Montecito resident Oprah Winfrey did own the property when the county sent out a notice of violation in April 2023, she was not the owner in February 2018 when repair work was done. 

She bought the property in 2019 from actor Jeff Bridges, Business Insider reported. She sold it last year in November in an off-market deal, per Siteline SB. 

While emergency building permits were requested and approved to fix other areas on the property damaged in the debris flows, the request for an emergency permit did not explicitly describe the creek wall work, staff said.

That portion of the creek is located within the appeals jurisdiction of the Coastal Zone, so any repairs in that area must go through a specific process.

Other walls and areas in Montecito were replaced and fixed around that same time — even one wall just up the way on the same property — but those projects were located more inland and don’t fall under the appeals jurisdiction of the Coastal Zone, staff said during the Montecito Planning meeting in September.

Because of that, the work done to reconstruct the creek wall in a “like-for-like” fashion in February 2018 was not done under the proper permits. 

Staff said in September that the applicant was unaware that a specific permit and process were needed to fix that portion of the wall.

Fourth District Supervisor Bob Nelson questioned why the original emergency permit in 2018 didn’t include the information about fixing the creek wall. 

“The applicants had to spend tens of thousands of dollars of county fees, and then maybe even six figures of experts, just because somebody was not specific enough,” Nelson said. “That seems really punitive in our system.”

Staff responded that the department relies on the parties requesting the emergency permits to accurately detail the work done.

The county sent out a violation notice to the property owner in April 2023 after nearby Montecito residents complained and raised concerns.

They argued that the reconstructed wall had altered the creek’s flow and was causing flooding on nearby properties during heavy rains. 

Two residents — Martha Hayduk and Carlos Araya — filed appeals of the Montecito Planning Commission’s September approval. 

The Santa Barbara County Flood Control Department determined that the reconstruction did not change the conveyance capacity — the maximum volume of water that flows through an area — of San Ysidro Creek.

Staff said the repaired wall meets the development standards for native plant community habitats and stream habitats. 

They also found the repairs replicate the original wall in both materials and design. 

Araya told the board the other appellant could not make it to the hearing at the time it was reviewed on Tuesday due to family medical issues.

The board denied the pair’s request for a continuance after hearing from staff, stating that all parties had agreed on this hearing date, and that it was time to move forward.

Araya told the board the creek wall has a “sharp bend that throws the creek against the east bank” and toward private and community properties. 

He said the creek hitting the wall at that angle is causing erosion and damage further downstream and to neighboring properties, such as the Ennisbrook Preserve. 

“That energy and mass needs to go somewhere,” he said. 

He showed the board several photos of storm damage in Montecito taken in early 2023. Heavy rainfall hit that area that January, including a massive storm on Jan. 9 that caused widespread flooding, rockfalls and debris flows. 

He said the appellants want the project reexamined and given a full hydraulic analysis on the wall’s effects on velocity, depth and stress on the creek.

Pending the results of those studies, they also want changes made to mitigate the impacts on the east bank of the creek. 

Representing the applicant, Laurel Perez of SEPPS Land Use Consulting pointed out the item on the table focuses on whether the wall was rebuilt in a “like-for-like” fashion, not whether the wall — which extends across multiple properties — is causing other issues. 

“The repair work did not increase flood risk, it did not alter creek flow conveyance, and it did not harm environmental resources,” Perez said. 

The wall itself has been in place long before modern flood flow regulations, she added — over 80 years, at least.  

“The repair work did not expand the wall, it didn’t extend it further into the creek, it did not alter its footprint or its height…” she said. “The reconstructed wall functions as it historically did and does not create new impacts.” 

The board unanimously voted to deny the appeal and legalize the project.

First District Supervisor Roy Lee said his office will work with the appellants to seek solutions to their problems with creek flow.

For the Record: This article was updated to include a photo of the disputed portion of the wall under construction in 2018.