Appeal Demonstrates Litigation’s Shadow

• City Council Is Mindful of Potential Courtroom Clashes

BY BILL KOENEKER

A controversial single-family home proposal located in Ramirez Canyon that was previously turned down by the Malibu City Council got another shot at life this week when the formal resolution rejecting the project was sent back to the staff.

Members decided on a 3-1 vote with Mayor Jeff Jennings dissenting and Councilmember Pamela Conley Ulich abstaining to not yet uphold the appeal until the staff could make another analysis of the issues.

The matter had been appealed to the council by Ramirez Canyon neighbors, who opposed the plans for a ridgetop mansion 28-feet high consisting of 9,276 square feet with an additional 4,427 square foot basement.

The permits and variances had previously been approved by the planning commission.

The council had overturned the planning panel’s approval and turned down the request by builder Norm Haynie. At this week’s meeting, members were expected to formally adopt the resolution upholding the appeal.

Jennings, who insisted there was nothing new for the staff to review, said the matter needed a new hearing. Subsequently, the council went off in different directions debating whether that was the case.

City Attorney Christi Hogin noting that there were attorneys for both sides pleading their cases recommended the matter go back for further staff review. “If doesn’t hurt. We have heard from the lawyers,” she noted.

However, Councilmember Ken Kearsley, who also voted to send the matter back for staff review, said he did not operate under the auspices of attorneys telling the city what to do. “I am not impressed. I am underwhelmed,” he said, adding the matter did not need a new hearing.

Conley Ulich, who was not at the appeal hearing, was told she could not vote on the matter since it was simply a formal resolution.

Haynie had argued he did not get a fair hearing before the council because of additional last minute information that was considered by the council.

Haynie, who usually represents himself before the council, had two attorneys speak including a lawyer from Alan Block’s office.

Councilmember Sharon Barovsky indicated she did not believe the matter needed a new hearing and had asked Hogin what were the council’s options.

The city attorney explained since the council had not taken final action, the matter could be reconsidered. She said the council’s options were to rehear or first hear back from the staff, who would analyze the comments made by the opposing attorneys.

In other action, two council members markedly disagreed about the disposition of a one-mile strip of land located between Pacific Coast Highway and Broad Beach Road.

The city attorney said the county decided the city holds title to the remnant strip of land that during the past years has been landscaped and irrigated by Broad Beach homeowners and the city should now maintain it.

Thinking the land may or may not include the road side strip above Broad Beach on PCH, Conley Ulich suggested the city consider utilizing the land as a park or turning it into a commercial use selling coffee or gelato. “It may be an opportunity for the city to operate it,” she said.

“It is not on the agenda and I am opposed to it,” said Councilmember Andy Stern, who lives nearby and often sells real estate on Broad Beach.

The mayor intervened and said it was his understanding the remnant land under discussion did not include the roadside strip considered by Conley Ulich.

Stern also wanted to know why the city should take the county’s word and accept the road. Hogin said the matter could be litigated. The county counsel had taken the position that right and title passed to the city upon incorporation and they would no longer do any maintenance.

Broad Beach homeowner Jo Giese said she wanted to know what would be involved to continue landscaping the land that property owners have treated as gardens.

City Manager Jim Thorsen said the matter was on the agenda for the city council to authorize the staff to meet with the Broad Beach homeowners association to discuss the acquisition and how the city would handle it.

After further discussion, the council approved the agenda item and directed the city attorney to negotiate a final agreement with the county and authorized the city manager to convene a meeting with the property owners.

In other action, the council, without discussion, approved a new contract with Solid Waste Solutions, Inc. to continue providing film permit processing for the city.

SWS had requested a rate increase from $60 an hour to $75 a permit which the council agreed to. The current rate had not been increased since 2000. The $60 charge is for each permit. SWS does not charge an additional amount to the city if there is additional filming days or if there are changes or complications, according to a staff report. SWS has provided film permitting processing and management services to the city since 2000 when a city employee separated from the municipality and joined up with the firm.