Study Urges Malibu to Widen Scope : Outsiders’ Support Seen as Vital to Anti-Growth Forces

When a group of seven UCLA graduate students prepared to spend 20 weeks studying the future of Malibu for a joint master’s thesis in urban planning, they argued among themselves about the motivation of residents who want to minimize growth there.

Some of the students thought most of the anti-development sentiment comes from selfish rich people who want to keep Malibu’s beaches and scenic vistas for themselves.

Others thought that Malibu’s landslides, brush fires and traffic congestion cause enough problems for legitimate concern about how much new construction to allow.

By the time their project was finished last month, the students had concluded that the problems are real. But the students also believe that Malibu residents are unlikely to win their battle for strict construction limits unless they win support from all over the Los Angeles Basin.

The students’ project, completed last month, is a consultant’s report for the Malibu Township Council, a civic organization that represents about 1,000 Malibu families and has lobbied for strict regulations on growth in the area.

“There’s a potential to maintain a really beautiful, rural area that’s just a hop, skip and a jump from the urban sprawl,” said Cliff Gladstein, one of the master’s degree candidates. “It would be really nice if we could maintain that.”

Help Needed

But keeping growth to rural levels cannot be done without enlisting the help of “voters . . . who use the Malibu area for recreational activity,” the students wrote. To succeed, they said, anti-growth forces must convince people from Woodland Hills to Eagle Rock that Malibu, “as the last undeveloped, natural coastal area in Los Angeles County . . . is the responsibility of all persons, not only local residents.”

The students’ recommendations include pushing for a countywide referendum on Malibu growth limits, lobbying the entire Board of Supervisors rather than just Deane Dana, who represents Malibu, and establishing a coalition of community and state environmental groups.

Forming an independent city of Malibu would allow residents to keep growth below the level advocated by county officials, the students wrote, but they added that “too many issues are pressing and must be dealt with prior to incorporation.” A fledgling cityhood effort is under way in Malibu, though several earlier efforts failed.

Land-Use Plan

In November, the California Coastal Commission adopted a land-use plan for Malibu. The plan allows about 5,000 more residences in Malibu, as opposed to more than 12,000 that the county wanted to permit. There are already about 8,000 houses and apartments in the Malibu coastal zone, which stretches along 27 miles of shoreline and five miles inland to the heart of the Santa Monica Mountains.

The county must agree with the land-use plan before it takes effect. County planning officials are expected to issue their formal reaction to the plan in the next few weeks. They have indicated that the two sides are close to an accord, but there are still reservations on the county’s part.

County officials have worried that too many restrictions would rob property owners, many of them with small lots, of the opportunity to build on their land.

The Township Council has had some influence with the Coastal Commission, but has sharply disagreed with the county Planning Department and the Board of Supervisors in the past.

Because of that, “it’s difficult for (the Township Concil) to make waves,” said Gwendy Silver, one of the students.

The Township Council “must shift its strategies because the circumstances are changing” as decisions are made by the county rather than the more sympathetic Coastal Commission, the students wrote.

As have others before them, the students pinpointed the crowded Pacific Coast Highway and a proposed sewer system for Malibu as the two factors most likely to influence growth.

Focus on Sewers

But because there is little room to expand the highway, “the focus is on the sewer system,” said Leo F. Estrada, an associate professor of urban planning who served as the students’ adviser. “If they can keep that out, it would keep PCH from getting torn up (during sewer construction) and could forestall major development for a while.

However, Estrada said, “we do not disagree” with the county’s contention that a sewer system is needed to protect public health. About 80% of Malibu’s waste water is handled by septic tank systems.

The Coastal Commission also has expressed the need for a sewer system.