Also at the meeting, the council tweaks the plastic foam ban and takes a step toward building an emergency access road in the Rambla Pacifico area.
By Jonathan Friedman / Assistant Editor
The City Council voted Monday to increase the fees for project appeals from $282 to $600, a far smaller figure than the one several council members proposed last month.
At the April quarterly meeting, Mayor Andy Stern, Mayor Pro Tem Ken Kearsley and Councilmember Sharon Barovsky had suggested appeal fees should be as close as possible to the amount of money it costs the city to work on an appeal. At that meeting, the council members proposed an appeal should cost $1,528. This figure was based on Environmental and Community Development Director Vic Peterson’s report that one recent appeal had cost the city that amount. He also reported another appeal had cost the city nearly $7,000. No information was ever given to the council on the cost to the city of other appeals or how much the average appeal costs.
At Monday’s meeting, former Planning Commission Chair Richard Carrigan presented the council with a document stating the appeal fees of eight coastal cities with budgets similar to Malibu. None of those cities had fees higher than $870, with some being significantly lower than that. Several of the council members thanked Carrigan for this information, which led them to a new conclusion.
“It’s another evolution for me,” Stern said. “When I first started this I was much more in favor of a higher appeal fee. I have been convinced that it would not be fair.”
Councilmember Jeff Jennings, who never supported raising appeal fees to the $1,528 mark, said he would like to see a requirement made that an appellant must be absolutely specific with his or her reason or reasons for an appeal. Jennings said this would make the job easier for city staff, which would be able to research specific points, rather than having to deal with a vague petition. This would also disallow an appellant from bringing up new issues during a hearing that the project applicant had not been prepared to debate.
Coffee cup lids escape ban
Also at the meeting, the council adjusted the ban on plastic foam it had approved earlier this year to not include items such as coffee cup lids. When the council banned polystyrene foam-commonly known by the trademark name Styrofoam-in late February, it meant that several products were outlawed that the council members said they had never intended to make illegal. With the council’s adjustment to banning polystyrene expandable foam, only items such as plastic foam containers and cups were banned.
“I didn’t mean to ban every single thing on the planet,” Barovksy said. “I was really going for what we know of as Styrofoam.”
But several restaurateurs were still upset with the updated ordinance, which will go into effect in July. Diana Nielsen, owner of Malibu Yogurt & Ice Cream, said in a telephone interview Tuesday that this will force her to use paper cups, which she said will not keep the frozen yogurt cold for long, and it will quickly melt.
“I really believe people will stop buying large [yogurts],” Nielsen said.
Nielsen said the situation would actually add to pollution, the reverse of what the plastic foam ban was intended to do, because the cups she will have to use will not be biodegradable. She said she had begun contacting some of the companies, which, according to the city, make biodegradable cups. She said the companies she contacted so far had not yet manufactured the cup, but she will contact the other companies later this week. Nielsen said the technology that will allow for biodegradable cups that will not make the yogurt melt quickly is still almost two years away.
Less Wiggins, owner of the Malibu KFC, said he is not sure what he will do because the ban will outlaw the containers in which he serves the side dishes.
Kearsley and Stern voted against the updated ban because they believe the council should have kept the old one. Kearsley said ridding the city of all plastic foam would be a step in the right direction.
“I think the answer really is to ban it and let the next city ban it, and the next city and the next city until it’s gone,” Kearsley said. “[Then] it is gone and in the Smithsonian Institute [will have an exhibit] to say, ‘look how stupid we were; we did not have a sustainable society for the last 50 years.'”
Step toward emergency access in Rambla Pacifico
With a large number of Rambla Pacifico residents in attendance applauding, the council unanimously voted to have the city spend $40,000 toward the research and design of an emergency access road in the area. Currently, the area is in a dangerous situation because Hume Road is collapsing and Las Flores Canyon Road is limited to one lane at some locations. This would create a dangerous situation for emergency vehicles needing to enter the area in case of a fire or medical emergency. Also, there is concern about how people could leave the area in the case of a fire.
According to the city, it will take about 60 days for the completion of the research and to create designs for an emergency access road. City Manager Katie Lichtig said in a telephone interview on Tuesday that she hoped it could take even less time. With the political process of granting a coastal development permit and hiring a company to construct the road, it could take another 215 days to complete the project. This could be reduced by 90 days if it were determined the project qualified for a coastal development permit exemption. The process could be done even more quickly if the residents took over the project and privately constructed the road.