Protecting a Gem

The California Coastal Commission is demanding a stricter development plan for the Malibu area, one of the gems on the ocean. The commission’s rejection of a package negotiated by the commission staff and Los Angeles County planners means that it will take more time to produce an acceptable plan. Time is a small price to pay to preserve such unique environmental values.

Under the 1976 Coastal Act, counties must prepare and win commission approval of land-use plans balancing ecological concerns, housing and commercial development, transportation, recreation and property rights of private individuals. The state remains in charge until a plan is approved. To date, 35 have been approved, but the Malibu plan has proved particularly contentious because of the conflicting pressures from developers, environmentalists, private citizens and Pepperdine University.

Earliest drafts contained wild ideas such as construction of an “upper corniche road” inland from but parallel to Pacific Coast Highway between Decker Canyon and Topanga Canyon. Those ideas have been dropped. Limits on allowable residential and commercial development also have been steadily lowered as the plan has gone back and forth between the Regional Planning Commission, the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors, the Coastal Commission and its staff.

On a 6-5 vote last month the commission decided to incorporate into the plan some concepts being sought by a citizens’ group, the Malibu Township Council, to ensure that development could not proceed without certain safeguards. For example, the latest draft of the plan called for limiting residential development to 2,110 new units until the California Department of Transportation decides whether to widen Pacific Coast Highway by eliminating the turn lane and roadside parking. The Coastal Commission approved the council recommendation that additional development not be allowed until Caltrans decided not only what to do but also how to pay for it. That makes sense to us.

The commission also voted to allow 400,000 square fee of commercial development and 300,000 square feet of growth at Pepperdine University--but no more--until the highway work is approved.

Still at issue are how to deal with the many small lots in the coastal area, some of which would be difficult to build on without substantial grading of mountainous terrain. The county, which has moved forward in providing for public access to beaches, still has to accept the concept of restricting construction in environmentally-sensitive areas.

Following the commission vote, the initiative now lies with the county’s Regional Planning Commission. The commission should take a lesson from the past. The longer that the county has held out on earlier plans, the tougher that environmentalists have become; now it’s time for a settlement.

Millions of Los Angeles area residents and visitors enjoy the surf, sand and hilly vistas of the Malibu region. Protecting that enjoyment for the Malibu visitors and the people who live there should be the criterion guiding Malibu planning.