I am addressing portions of your December 14 article on “Rambla Pacifico repairs” as to which I believe you have been misinformed. The Rambla Pacifico slide destroyed access to PCH for residents living north of the slide. Approximately one half of the new road proposed by the residents designed to link Rambla to Las Flores Canyon and PCH, is on property owned by the Poulin family. The Rambla residents formed a corporation, “Lower Rambla Pacifico Owners Association, Inc.” which has heretofore entered into a written agreement with the Poulins for construction by the corporation of the access road across the Poulin property. That agreement is still in full force and effect.
Your article states that Guy Poulin refused to give up a public right-of-way to the Poulin property. Obviously, the agreement by the Poulins to permit a portion of the proposed road to be constructed across their property is evidence to the contrary.
You refer to litigation as one of the reasons for delay in completing the project. There has been no litigation involving the project. It was delayed for a considerable time as a consequence of the litigation between the City of Malibu and the California Coastal Commission involving the Local Coastal Program (LCP). During the pendency of that litigation, the permitting process for building and construction virtually came to a halt.
Further, you state in your article that the “final block to a solution” in proceeding with the project was to design it to avoid encroaching on the Poulin property. In fact, the design was changed from time to time to avoid encroaching on properties other than the Poulin property.
The City has helped in many ways. Countless hours by the administration, the staff and the city attorney have been devoted to the project. It has also contributed to the cost of completing the project construction plans at a crucial time.
David Kagon