City must negotiate on parks campsite issue
“If there is another fire” is a phrase Malibu residents don’t use. Residents know that fire is an inevitable phenomenon in Malibu. One of the critical functions of the city government is to manage land uses and otherwise take actions that will reduce the risk of fire and increase the City’s ability to contain the fires when they come.
At its October 9 meeting, the Planning Commission considered the Santa Monica Mountains Conservancy’s proposal to install campsites in four parks in Malibu. Nearly 60 residents expressed concern that the City was not taking the threat of fire seriously enough. Several residents offered the straightforward suggestion that the City should simply ban all camping. Those who follow the intricacies of land use control in Malibu won’t be surprised that the City’s options are not so simple.
The Conservancy owns and operates several parks in Malibu to which it wants to improve access and add campsites. Months ago, the Conservancy initiated proceedings to accomplish its improvement projects as a “public works plan” (PWP), which means the plan would be approved by the Coastal Commission, not the City. The City opposed the Conservancy’s efforts to bypass the City on the grounds that it unnecessarily deprived Malibu the opportunity to evaluate the proposal and impose conditions that would make the plan compatible with the neighborhoods in which the parks are located. The Conservancy finally agreed to go through the City’s hearing process and address its proposal through an amendment to the Local Coastal Program (LCP).
As a result, the City obtained influence over, but not absolute control of, the Conservancy’s plans. The Conservancy is a state agency and the City’s local laws generally do not apply to state agencies. However, the LCP implements state law (the Coastal Act) so the Conservancy must comply with the LCP.
The City cannot prohibit camping in all parks in Malibu. The Coastal Commission made camping a “permitted use” in the parks when it wrote and adopted the Malibu LCP. Because the City owns and runs Charmlee, the City can refuse to allow legal camping there; however, the City cannot prevent camping at any park owned by federal or state government (including the Conservancy), which includes Escondido Canyon Park, Corral Canyon Park, Ramirez Canyon Park and Zuma Canyon Park at the end of Bonsall.
The alternative to rejecting the Conservancy’s application is to continue negotiating with the Conservancy. Boiled down to practical terms, the City’s choice is between these two options:
Option One: the City just says “no.” Under this scenario, the Conservancy could apply to the Coastal Commission under a PWP to develop approximately 50 campsites in parks it owns, which would be operated according to rules decided by the Conservancy and the Coastal Commission. The Conservancy could accommodate eight campsites at Escondido, 11 at Ramirez and as many as 25 at Corral. That’s 44 campsites. In addition, the Conservancy is considering at least half a dozen campsites on federal parkland in Zuma Canyon at the end of Bonsall in order to provide some campsites west of Kanan Dume.
Option Two: the City negotiates with the Conservancy. This is the City’s opportunity to impose limitations on the Conservancy; for example, allow only up to eight sites in Charmlee and up to 16 sites in Corral Canyon for a total of 24 campsites, plus organized camp programs for disabled youth on three or four sites at the Ramirez Canyon Park. This option also allows the City to impose operational conditions such as no camping during red flag days, cold camping only (no fires whatsoever), require wildfire trained staff in each park 24 hours, install and maintain water storage tanks and firefighting equipment in each park and prohibit camping in the other areas.
Camping at Escondido and in upper Bonsall (Zuma Canyon) pose unmitigatable adverse impacts in the City’s estimation. However, the City has had many successful, supervised overnight camping programs in Charmlee, including Indian Guides, church groups, children’s programs, and nature sleepovers. The choice to eliminate camping in Charmlee (where it has already existed) is at the expense of influence over whether and under what conditions camping is allowed in all other parks in the City.
The Conservancy has agreed to work with the City to create a public process to discuss the issues. The Planning Commission meeting was the first important forum for that discussion. To continue the dialogue, the City of Malibu is organizing a workshop on the Conservancy’s proposal on Nov. 10, at 10 a.m. at the Point Dume Community Center. The City Council is scheduled to hold its hearing on Nov. 13, at Malibu City Hall.
Christi Hogin
Malibu City Attorney