The Planning Commission is unable to discuss an application for the demolition of an existing home and construction of a new one to replace it because the city did not receive a letter commenting on the project from the California Coastal Commission until three hours before Monday night’s meeting.
By Jonathan Friedman / Assistant Editor
At Monday’s Planning Commission meeting, Commissioner John Sibert spoke out against a last-minute letter sent to the city from the California Coastal Commission that forced the continuance of an item on the commission’s agenda. Sibert said it was unconscionable to put applicants in a position in which they must prepare for a meeting, and then find out just before the session that their item would not be heard.
The letter of contention, written by Coastal Commission Planning and Regulation Supervisor Barbara Carey, suggested there was a Local Coastal Program violation in a coastal development permit application before the Planning Commission for the demolition of an existing home and the construction of a 5,308-square-foot house on Malibu Road. The city says it did not receive the letter until 3:30 p.m. on Monday, about three hours prior to the Planning Commission meeting. Planning Manager C.J. Amstrup said this did not give city staff enough time to address the Coastal Commission concerns.
“I’m really upset by the Coastal Commission’s handling of this kind of thing,” Sibert said. “Three-thirty on the day of the hearing, to send this kind of info [at that time is unacceptable] … There has to be some way to send a message that says, ‘Don’t do this.'”
Planning Commission Chair Les Moss and Commissioner Regan Schaar echoed Sibert’s concerns, saying it was unfair to the applicants.
Amstrup said he did not believe there was much more the city could do than ask the Coastal Commission staff to send its comments to the city earlier. Carey said in a phone interview Tuesday that she had been on a vacation, but usually tries to get her comments to the city in a timely manner.
During the public comment portion of the meeting, Point Dume activist John Mazza came to the defense of the Coastal Commission staff. He said since the Planning Commission staff reports are usually not made available until 10 days prior to a meeting, the Coastal Commission staff has a limited amount of time to read the material, research it and address any issues.
Mazza said the city’s planning staff should come up with reports at least five days earlier than they usually do. Amstrup said the planning staff has tried to make staff reports available 12 days prior to the commission meetings rather than the standard 10, but admitted it is sometimes difficult to do that.
Moss had little sympathy for the alleged time constraints for the Coastal Commission staff, saying if they want to comment on Malibu matters they should be able to get it done in adequate time.
Comments by Coastal Commission staff on items before the Planning Commission are taken seriously because they usually mean the item will be appealed to the state agency if the Planning Commission does not consider them. Several times since Malibu began issuing coastal development permits late last year, the Coastal Commission has sent comments to the city regarding applications and after the Planning Commission approved the items, the Coastal Commission appealed the applications. Certain kinds of coastal permit applications can be appealed to the Coastal Commission either by a resident or two coastal commissioners.
Also at Monday’s meeting, Sibert clarified comments he and other commissioners had made at two previous meetings stating they were more interested in expert advice than comments coming from ordinary residents. Sibert said on Monday that this did not mean he would only accept city staff advice, but rather that he preferred his advice come from experts in the field.
“What we [Planning Commission] need is evidence, not assertions,” Sibert said. “When we have some expert people who actually specialize in that field, we prefer that evidence against somebody who says, ‘I don’t believe that.'”
Also, Amstrup announced that the planning staff had approved coastal permits for the construction of a 5,765-square-foot home on Latigo Canyon Road and for the construction of a 2,807-square-foot home on Birdview Avenue.
If a majority of the commission requests it, planning staff-approved coastal permit applications can be forced to go before the Planning Commission for further review. This request was not made for either item.
The commission will meet again on Nov. 7..”