Several people in the community have asked me whether various remarks made during the Trancas Park hearing are true. In reviewing the record, there does seem to be a good deal of misinformation.
Councilwoman [Sharon] Barovsky stated that “one of the reasons I did not vote for the Goldman plan was that it … cut the dog park in two. We had already cut it in two and thrown away half of it but to cut it in two again making two separate parks, neither of which were really viable as could be called dog parks.” In fact, the dog park has the same overall area as the city’s plan, has a larger level area than the city’s plan and can easily be combined into one area. Also, this area is larger than the Calabasas large and small dog parks, a community of 80,000 people compared to Malibu’s, which is less than 40 percent that size.
The transcript also talks about the alternative plan requiring a very costly 20-foot high retaining wall. Unfortunately, I was never asked if this was true, and in fact our plan simply requires a 4-1/2 foot wall approximately 80 feet long.
And the record further suggests that with 20-foot walls and larger dog parks and other possible unknown issues, the $1 million savings would not likely be realized. Not only is this mischaracterized, but also the savings is likely to be well over $1 million.
Unfortunately at the hearing, I was never asked to comment on these apparent misunderstandings. But if these items were in fact the basis for their vote, then the council should revisit the issue and become more informed before turning down a design which clearly has the community’s support, functions better, and will save over $1 million!
Ron Goldman