The issues began earlier this year when the city council passed a motion in response to feedback from two community meetings that requested traffic calming measures to be implemented in the Point Dume area “as soon as possible.”
Much of the traffic has been caused by visitors from outside the Point Dume area trying to access Malibu’s beaches. Visitors zip down Point Dume’s streets looking for parking but frequently find “no parking” signs on large stretches of clear street.
The motion, which passed unanimously on March 14, included implementing radar advisory signs, striping of select roads, reducing speed limits, adding crosswalks, adding speed humps and requesting residents remove encroachments from the right of way.
By June, the city discovered those changes were not unanimously wanted by the Point Dume community.
The most volatile issue so far has been encroachment removal.
The website savepointdume.com displays in giant red letters “On March 14, the Malibu City Council ruled that all Point Dume homeowners must remove up to 16 feet of landscaping along the street as part of a ‘traffic management plan.’”
Flyers have been distributed into Point Dume mailboxes with similar language.
“[Our motion] talked about encroachments. It didn’t say two feet, four feet, it didn’t say anything. There was no quantifying language to that motion,” Council Member Joan House said.
The flyer distributed throughout Point Dume also referred to the survey as “rigged.” Council members were disappointed that the discussion on the topic had been soured.
“Someone has their own opinion. They’re slanting information [and] they’re feeding it into Point Dume. This is shameful. For the intelligence we have in this community I’m very sad to say I saw these things,” House said.
“This has been terribly mismanaged by the city,” resident Don Richstone told city council on June 27. “Council has lost all credibility on this.” Richstone’s three-minute public comment, which demanded the revoking of the motion, received applause from the audience in attendance.
The June 27 council meeting saw over a dozen Point Dume residents present their case in opposition to the motion passed, many of whom were upset they only heard about the motion within the past week when the city decided to host a third meeting on June 16.
“I was at all three of those meetings. The first two seemed like the same group of people and the third meeting was a completely different group of people,” Mayor Lou La Monte said in response to complaints.
Some residents were disappointed the council wasn’t more familiar with the history of Point Dume’s “no parking” signs.
“The reason the no parking zones are there is because the residents begged the county to put them in,” Jim Shoensield said. “[The Coastal Commission] wanted Point Dume to go back to being a parking lot for beachgoers, and mercifully [former city council member] Carolyn Van Horn listened, and she stopped it. I wish Carolyn were here because she would’ve done a phenomenal job.”
Due to impassioned feedback from the community, City Manager Reva Feldman suggested sending out a survey to Point Dume residents. The survey will be sent out physically but can also be completed online (http://www.malibucity.org/pdtraffic). The online version requires a Point Dume address and the city is able to sort results by address to check for duplicates or fake addresses. Residents have until Aug. 5 to complete the survey.
Until the survey results are received by the city, all actions at Point Dume are suspended. However, the city has not officially revoked its motion yet. In fact, many of the road safety measures have already been implemented. In subsequent meetings, some Point Dume residents have noted a beneficial change to their street.
“The street is now more passable. You can walk almost without fear of being pinched off by the cars on both sides of the street and being in the way of traffic,” 34-year-resident Sam Seelig said. “However, one door closes, another opens.” Seelig explained that his street, Grasswood, now has more speeding on it because it is more accessible from other roads. This has led Seelig to support speed humps being added to Grasswood.
“The speed humps on the other streets are working; I’ve watched them work,” Seelig said.
Other residents have also expressed an acceptance of traffic safety measures such as speed humps or striping, but true consensus won’t be known until the survey results.
The website “savepointdume” also displays a video specifying the case of Mark DiPaolo, a resident in Point Dume who has a code enforcement case against him for encroachment removal. DiPialo, and the website, present the case as a cautionary tale of what will happen to other Point Dume residents if the city has its way. DiPaolo is potentially facing thousands of dollars in fines or jail time.
The city has indicated that DiPaolo’s case is unique and other Point Dume residents would not have a similar situation but have not elaborated on those differences to The Malibu Times.
