Compromise on size of bed and breakfast units causes owners to pause; they do not confirm whether they will
continue with plans to build.
By Jonathan Friedman/Special to The Malibu Times
Just as it appeared the Forge family’s long odyssey had reached a successful conclusion, the City Council presented them with another dilemma Monday night. Although the council approved the project to build a seven-building, 27-unit bed and breakfast complex along the northeast corner of Pacific Coast Highway and Corral Canyon Road, it reduced the size of each unit from 680 square feet to 580 square feet. This could mean the project might never see the light of day, as the Forges will have to decide if it is still worthwhile. And a representative from the Sierra Club’s Angeles Chapter said he has not ruled out the possibility of a lawsuit to prevent the project from going ahead.
Shortly after the Planning Commission approved the project last December, the Sierra Club sent the city an appeal. Sierra’s David Brown spoke at the meeting about several environmental concerns he had with the project, including one that it would jeopardize an ongoing project to restore steelhead trout to Solstice Canyon Creek. He also voiced concerned that the project would be within the 100-foot setback from the creek’s ESHA (environmentally sensitive habitat area.)
According to the City Code, a structure cannot be built within a 100-foot setback of an ESHA “if feasible.” Councilmember Jeff Jennings stressed the last two words of the rule at the meeting. He added that if the project were not approved, the city would be missing out on an opportunity to give new life to an area that has decayed.
“It has been graded and re-graded,” he said. “There has obviously been an enormous amount of fill brought in. There has been debris brought in. There has been nonnative vegetation that needs to be cleared. We have now an opportunity to achieve all these things.”
He also suggested the steelhead trout would be helped by the project, since its restoration depended on going through a stream on the Forge’s property. They would have no reason to help this along if the project were disapproved.
There was nearly three hours of public testimony at the meeting. An overwhelming majority spoke in favor of the project; many suggesting it was too many years in the making. But there were also a good number of people who spoke against it
Paul Shoop, an attorney for the Forges, said, during his rebuttal opportunity, that nothing had come up from the opposition that needed comment, adding they had not introduced any scientific evidence. He said the staff report and the environmental impact report had already addressed everything.
When the item came to the council for deliberation, Kearsley and Mayor Pro Tem Sharon Barovsky expressed concern about the size of the proposed units. Kearsley suggested they be reduced to 480 square feet. His motion was approved 3 to 2, with Jennings and Joan House voicing opposition.
“We’re wandering off into areas that we don’t really have any business being in,” Jennings said. “It’s really not our job to design the project.”
The situation then took a twist, when the project’s architect, Mike Barsocchini, passed a note to Jennings that 480 square feet could not work. He said it would prohibit the ability to construct suites. A compromise of 580 square feet was offered. The council then voted 4 to 1 to reconsider, which was followed by a vote of 4 to 1 to approve it, with the new condition. Kearsley cast both dissenting votes.
Following the meeting, BeauRivage restaurant owner and project applicant Daniel Forge said the council should have left the units at the original proposal.
“It’s not that big (square footage difference), but it makes a difference,” he said. “You can have a nice closet and so on. What’s the advantage of cutting it like this?”
Forge said he has no plans to challenge the city any further with the matter, because he has already spent enough money. But he declined to comment on whether he would actually go through with the project.
Also as part of the council motion, a radar test must be done on the property to determine if there are any hazardous tanks underground, left over from a gas station that existed there many years ago. The project must be passed a second time by the council for final approval, then the Forges must go before the California Coastal Commission to get a coastal permit received years ago for a shopping center on the property amended for the new plan.
Brown said he was disappointed with the council’s decision. He added that a lawsuit might not necessarily be the next step, but it is not out of the question.